評論
打印
And whose goals should these be, anyway? Which goals should they be?
不過，這些目標到底是誰的目標？這些目標到底是什么目標？
This brings us to the third part of our rocket metaphor: the destination.
這就引出了火箭比喻的第三部分：目的地。
We're making AI more powerful, trying to figure out how to steer it, but where do we want to go with it?
我們要讓人工智能的力量更強大，試圖想辦法來操控它，但我們到底想把它帶去何方呢？
This is the elephant in the room that almost nobody talks about -- not even here at TED
這就像是房間里的大象，顯而易見卻無人問津--甚至在TED也沒人談論，
because we're so fixated on short-term AI challenges.
因為我們都把目光聚焦于短期的人工智能挑戰。
Look, our species is trying to build AGI, motivated by curiosity and economics,
你們看，我們人類正在試圖建造AGI，由我們的好奇心以及經濟需求所帶動，
but what sort of future society are we hoping for if we succeed?
但如果我們能成功，希望能創造出怎樣的未來社會呢？
We did an opinion poll on this recently, and I was struck to see that most people actually want us to build superintelligence:
最近對于這一點，我們做了一次觀點投票，結果很讓我驚訝，大部分的人其實希望我們能打造出超級人工智能：
AI that's vastly smarter than us in all ways.
在各個方面都比我們聰明的人工智能。
What there was the greatest agreement on was that we should be ambitious and help life spread into the cosmos,
大家甚至一致希望我們應該更有野心，并協助生命在宇宙中的拓展，
but there was much less agreement about who or what should be in charge.
但對于應該由誰，或者什么來主導，大家就各持己見了。
And I was actually quite amused to see that there's some some people who want it to be just machines.
有件事我覺得非常奇妙，就是我看到有些人居然表示讓機器主導就好了。
And there was total disagreement about what the role of humans should be, even at the most basic level,
至于人類該扮演怎樣的角色，大家的意見簡直就是大相徑庭，即使在最基礎的層面上也是，
so let's take a closer look at possible futures that we might choose to steer toward, alright?
那么讓我們進一步去看看這些可能的未來，我們可能去往目的地，怎么樣？
