The Instigator
yejuneyoon
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
sf22
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

A.I is a threat to the future of humanity.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/18/2016 Category: Science
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 253 times Debate No: 91441
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

yejuneyoon

Pro

Hello Con, thank you for accepting this debate.
I will now state my argument.
I think A.I is a threat to the future of humanity because first, it will cause an economic crisis where approximately (based on mathematical calculations) 90~99% of the people in the world lose their jobs.
Since now, A.Is have been only able to undertake simple or small jobs such as factory labors, but as the A.I industry develops, said A.I is now able to perform relatively complex tasks in various fields of expertise, including law-related, medical, technical, etc. There has been already many cases of A.Is pulling ahead of people in various fields. For example, the A.I program Watson, invented by IBM, has a 82.6% chance of correctly diagnosing cancer, while some of the best doctors in the world have only a 60~80% chance of detecting cancer. Also, in Wall Street, human fund managers, after an year, had 3% loss, but an A.I fund manager, after the same period of time, had raised a 5% profit. It is now clear that A.Is are about to overtake humans" jobs and leave the world in the Second Great Depression. And this one will be affecting the world, not just the USA.
sf22

Con

I accept this debate. I'll be arguing that AI is not a threat for the future of humanity and we should investigate it more. I want to apologize because I'm not a native English speaker and I will probably make some grammar and spelling mistakes.

Pro's main argument is that AI works better and faster than humans, so it will undertake jobs which are nowadays done by humans, causing a rise in unemployment. First of all, it is true that AI does many tasks better than people. In fact, that is the main reason it's being developed. I don't see anything bad in an AI detecting cancer better than doctors, it will help to cure more people.

Pro argues that, as AI replace humans, unemployment will rise. That isn't necessarily true. For example, in the Middle Ages, peasants used to work all day long. When agriculture and industry were mechanized in the 19th century, the tertiary sector, that is, jobs that consist in providing services, appeared. And people started having some free time. If AI replaces people in some jobs, other occupations will appear.

Although there will probably be less work to do, instead of firing people, companies could reduce working time for those who are employed. Of course, companies won't want do do that, especially if they have to maintain worker's salaries, but that is not a problem of AI, that is a problem of pure free-market capitalism. Laws should protect workers of such abusive behaviours, as they did in the 19th century pressured by labor unions and organized workers' movements. This is not a valid argument against AI, but against capitalism.

I believe that, if well regulated, AI and technology in general will increase the quality of products and services. If well regulated, in the future AI will give us more free time and will improve our standards of life.
Debate Round No. 1
yejuneyoon

Pro

Thank you Con for accepting this debate. I have to say, you English is excellent for a non-native. And don't worry, I'm not a native English speaker either.
Con argues that when A.I is regulated well, there will be more benefits, but I think Con is misunderstanding the nature of humans. There are many cases proving that humans will do anything for money and their wellbeing. For example, the Volkswagen Case, where the Volkswagen Company, in order to sell more cars, they operated on the fuel efficiency of cars. This was done for money, showing once again that humans will do anything for money.
This goes the same for A.I. For money, some idiot will sell A.I over to bad guys who are able to use A.I for crimes, terrors, etc. It will have a negative effect on the society. A.Is are threats. A.Is themselves are not evil, but when placed in bad hands (which has a high chance of happening), A.I becomes a potential killing machine.
Con has also argued that it will give us more free time, but then that will result in a society without jobs. And what do we call a society without jobs, where everyone gets the same amount of money whatever they do? It's a communist society. And we all know how the Soviet and East European societies turned out. If A.Is are created and give people more FREE TIME, society will temporarily be similar to a communist society (I know this sounds far-fetched, but I believe it is true), and then it will eventually fail. The result will be a catastrophic disaster.
Con argues that other occupations will appear if some are taken over. I think con is misunderstanding the scale of unemployed people on Earth. The only jobs on Earth that cannot be replaced by A.I is politicians and diplomats, and according to some mathematical calculations, those kind of jobs only consist of 1~2% of the whole world's jobs. I believe I have mentioned this in my first argument. Maybe some jobs will appear, but I don't think it is enough to fill in for 99% of the world's population.
sf22

Con

First of all, Pro argues that AI is dangerous because it could end up in bad hands. However, this cannot be prevented in any way. If AI was banned, criminals and terrorists would still investigate on it. We'll agree that the bad guys having AI while the good ones don't is far worse than both of them having it. We could stop developing AI, but it would be impossible to prevent bad people from doing so.

Pro also asserts that more free time will lead to a society without jobs, which is a communist society. That's what a communist society is: there is no work, everybody is happy, and such things. That would be good, but it is impossible too. However, the Soviet Union and these countries that called themselves "Communist" were Socialist dictatorships. People still worked, and there was inequality. In theory, the Socialist dictatorship would eventually bring a communist society, but as we know that never happened. That's why Marxism/Socialism does not work.

In a techno-utopia, that is, a perfect society achieved through technology (it could also be called communist, but this can cause confusion), people wouldn't need to work because everything they need would be made by machines. Not everybody would earn the same amount of money: money would not exist, it is meaningless if you can get everything for free.

Despite that, AI cannot even lead to this utopia. Thanks to tecnology we need to work less and our lifes are more confortable, but we still have to work. With AI we'll work even less and life will be even more confortable, but the need to work won't disappear. There will always be jobs which can't be done, or shouldn't be done, by AIs, such as politicians and programmers of AIs. In short, there's no reason to oppose the development of AI, at least not an economic reason. People losing their jobs is a fault of the economic system, that is, capitalism, which has nothing to do with AI.
Debate Round No. 2
yejuneyoon

Pro

yejuneyoon forfeited this round.
sf22

Con

sf22 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
yejuneyoon

Pro

yejuneyoon forfeited this round.
sf22

Con

sf22 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
yejuneyoon

Pro

yejuneyoon forfeited this round.
sf22

Con

sf22 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by lyokowarri0r 9 months ago
lyokowarri0r
I don't even think AI on this scale is possible. Would have loved to take this debate.
Posted by vi_spex 9 months ago
vi_spex
because when i talk to them they are 1 and the same
Posted by vi_spex 9 months ago
vi_spex
Jesus is an ai
No votes have been placed for this debate.