The publication of an open letter last week called for an immediate halt to creating systems “more powerful” than OpenAI’s latest GPT-4, which can have human-like conversations, write music, and summarize lengthy papers and ideas.
Almost a thousand AI specialists were signatories, including Elon Musk.
Experts, including Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, signed the letter arguing for a balanced assessment of the risks and benefits.
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, who was included in the group, has said that proposals to halt the development of artificial intelligence would not “address the difficulties ahead.” This was his first public remark since the open letter started a discussion over the future of technology.
The technologist-turned-philanthropist said that it is more important to focus on making the most use of current achievements in the area, even if it is difficult to grasp how a halt in AI research would be implemented globally scale.
Gates said on Monday that he doesn’t think asking one specific group to cease will solve the troubles ahead.
He said it’s evident that there are significant benefits to AI; nonetheless, what we need to do is pinpoint the trouble spots.
To get an edge over its rivals, Microsoft has invested several billions of dollars in ChatGPT owner OpenAI.
Gates has been a vocal proponent of AI, praising the technology’s transformational potential and drawing comparisons to the internet and mobile phones.
He said that artificial intelligence should be utilized to assist in eliminating some of the world’s biggest injustices in a blog post headlined “The Age of AI has started,” published and dated March 21, a day before the open letter.
He also mentioned the difficulty of putting in place the particulars of any pause during the interview.
He said he doesn’t get who they’re saying could stop utilizing AI technology, or why every country in the world would agree to stop, or why they should stop,” he added.
He summed up the controversy with a rather bland and obvious thought-
“There are a lot of different opinions on the matter.”