Visit to get our entire library of TED Talks, transcripts, translations, personalized Talk recommendations and more.
Humanity is on its way to creating a "black ball": a technological breakthrough that could destroy us all, says philosopher Nick Bostrom. In this incisive, surprisingly light-hearted conversation with Head of TED Chris Anderson, Bostrom outlines the vulnerabilities we could face if (or when) our inventions spiral beyond our control — and explores how we can prevent our future demise.
The TED Talks channel features the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes (or less). Look for talks on Technology, Entertainment and Design — plus science, business, global issues, the arts and more. You're welcome to link to or embed these videos, forward them to others and share these ideas with people you know. For more information on using TED for commercial purposes (e.g. employee learning, in a film or online course), submit a Media Request here:
Follow TED on Twitter:
Like TED on Facebook:
Subscribe to our channel:
AI is increasingly being painted in darker and darker tones in the media. When Elon Musk says he’s very scared, it’s pretty intimidating. At least there are some great minds evaluating the possibilities
Probably to subconsciously prepare the masses for the next existential threat.
Soviets, terrorists, etc….
Liam McCalister Seems like every generation has had some specific existential dread for it. Soviets, y2k, nuclear war, etc…
elon musk is scared of AI,why do his cars have AI in it to self-drive the car,would have been better to not incorporate so much tech
once it fails,a driving car will be devastating,the system gets wireless updates,what if it received a virus that tells the car to ride off a mountain cliff
very reasuring dont you think,give me a manual car everyday
Ronny B Elon Musk IS AI.
It’s scary that it’s the most likely theory that we live in a simulation…
No, Nick Bostrom once contemplated that IF there were ancestral simulations then we are more likely to be part of one then not.
There’s nothing really bizarre about it. Definition of reality still remains unaltered.
uday kadam the effects of reality remain unaltered. The definition of reality would literally be changed, ‘redefined’ if you will.
No any way exist to destroy civilization
it is in progress day by day
What is that expression: The more unpredictable the world becomes, the more we rely on predictions. lol Talking on this topic falls in the category of Nostradamus, pure speculation. Usually with some hidden agenda and if not agenda than personal bias. So there is that.
@Matt Greek ESASC Well when you look back on people making great predictions, statistically how often they were right? I think the record is pretty bad. But guys like Nostradamus made a fortune from it. What makes Nick Bostrom any different? He has everything to gain and nothing to lose to make such claims and sell books. But what if…. what if… he had to bet his life on his predictions. Do you think he would write the same way? See what I mean.
Krunoslav Stifter I do see you mean. But I don’t think Nostradamus made a lot of money from his predictions. Happy to be proved wrong on that.
@Matt Greek ESASC Well I know he consulted kings so they must have payed him well. Also Wiki says: He wrote an almanac for 1550 and, as a result of its success, continued writing them for future years as he began working as an astrologer for various wealthy patrons. Catherine de’ Medici became one of his foremost supporters. Sounds like was successful for its time.
Krunoslav Stifter yeah, fair play. Not quite sure that the level of data used for these ‘predictions’ are comparable to Nostradamus though. To also be fair.
@Matt Greek ESASC Fair point. However I have another concern. Methods and motivations behind data collection as well as interpretation of collected data. Here is what I mean:
“If you work hard, and become successful, it does not necessarily mean you are successful because you worked hard, just as if you are tall with long hair it doesn’t mean you would be a midget if you were bald. ” ― Lemony Snicket (Daniel Handler)
Causation vs. Correlation: Correlation does not imply causation.
Causation at its simplest definition refers to determining the cause or reason for some sort of phenomenon. … A correlation is simply a recognized relationship between two things or events, but it does not imply causation. Rather, in cases of correlation, one thing or event predicts another.
If there is a correlation, then sometimes we can assume that the dependent variable changes solely because the independent variables change. This is where the debate between correlation and causation occurs. However, there is a difference between cause and effect (causation) and relationship (correlation). One does not automatically imply the other.
During World War II, Allied bomber losses were high, so the powers that be demanded a fix. The engineers set out to eyeball every bomber they could, gathering great statistics for each bullet hole. After a long study they decided to add more armor plating to the areas that had the highest concentrations of holes. A bit after these improved planes were deployed, they received some startling news: more planes were going down than before. At this point I thought, “Did they make them too heavy?”
Then the light bulb went on for someone: they had measured every bullet hole in every plane at their disposal, but they’d failed to realize it was the ones that they did not have access to that mattered. It was the ones that did not return that needed to be scrutinized. They needed to improve the armor in the places that the returning planes had no bullet holes.
“I pass with relief from the tossing sea of Cause and Theory to the firm ground of Result and Fact.”
― Winston S. Churchill, The Story of the Malakand Field Force
“We want the facts to fit the preconceptions. When they don’t, often it is easier to ignore the facts than to change the preconceptions. ”
— Jessamyn West, US novelist (1903-1984)
Some people make an assumption they foolhardily want to believe in and than try to find evidence to support their assumption. Scientific approach is about looking at statistics and adjusting your assumptions according to what they reveal to you.
“Beware of people who use statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts – for support rather than illumination.”
— Andrew Lang, British author (1844-1912)
To take full advantage of the interpreting the data correctly we often need experience.
“Information is pretty thin stuff unless mixed with experience. ”
— Clarence Day, US author (1874-1935)
Ted Kaczynski was right
It’s always been doom and gloom.
Get rid of all psychopaths.
…Said a sociopath… “Get rid of all sociopaths!” … Said a bipolar guy … “Get rid of all bipolars!” … Said a schisophremic … […]
You can understand why they want to cover this subject, it’s facinating! But this short form did not make it justice. I would love to se him again on Joe Rogan fore a more in dept conversation.
Nick Bostrom is one of my favorite authors, good to see a talk by him
Put the subtitles in spanish plsss 🙁
11:50
His possible solutions are fairy tales. The only answer that could possibly work — and possibly it’s a fairy tale — is to pull out a golden ball: a technology that counteracts black balls.
How does the mass surveillance not increase the risk of the other ends he fears.
dakota Nobriga yeah, perplexing. Although I suppose, if used morally and correctly, we may see societal improvement as a result of mass surveillance.
But I hate the idea of increased surveillance, it’s a horrible concept in the world we live in and I really cringed when he said ‘freedom tag’. Horrible.
This chat is very superficial, it’s possible these ideas have some merit but as presented they sound very weak indeed.
No new information here.
Aparently USA has all 4 of these be traits.
Hi
5G will kill us all!!!
😉