Full episode with Judea Pearl (Dec 2019): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEBI0vF45ic
Clips channel (Lex Clips): https://www.youtube.com/lexclips
Main channel (Lex Fridman): https://www.youtube.com/lexfridman
(more links below)



Podcast full episodes playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAXtmErZgOdP_8GztsuKi9nrraNbKKp4

Podcasts clips playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLrAXtmErZgOeciFP3CBCIEElOJeitOr41

Podcast website:
https://lexfridman.com/ai

Podcast on Apple Podcasts (iTunes):
https://apple.co/2lwqZIr

Podcast on Spotify:
https://spoti.fi/2nEwCF8

Podcast RSS:
https://lexfridman.com/category/ai/feed/

Judea Pearl is a professor at UCLA and a winner of the Turing Award, that's generally recognized as the Nobel Prize of computing. He is one of the seminal figures in the field of artificial intelligence, computer science, and statistics. He has developed and championed probabilistic approaches to AI, including Bayesian Networks and profound ideas in causality in general. These ideas are important not just for AI, but to our understanding and practice of science. But in the field of AI, the idea of causality, cause and effect, to many, lies at the core of what is currently missing and what must be developed in order to build truly intelligent systems. For this reason, and many others, his work is worth returning to often.

Subscribe to this YouTube channel or connect on:
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/lexfridman
- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/lexfridman
- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/lexfridman
- Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lexfridman
- Medium: https://medium.com/@lexfridman
- Support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/lexfridman

Do you have concerns about the future of AI?

All the different trajectories of all of our research.

Where the movement heads, where are your concerns?

I'm concerned because I know we are building a new species that has a capability of exceeding our, exceeding us, exceeding our capabilities and can breed itself and take over the world, absolutely.

We don't know the degree to which we control it.

We don't even understand what it means to be able to control this new species.

I don't have anything to add to that because it's such a gray area, that's unknown.

The only time it happened in history was evolution with human beings.

For us it was, but a few people along the way, a few creatures along the way would not agree.

So it's just because it's such a gray area, there's nothing else to say.

But some people would look at you and say, yeah, but we were looking to you to help us make sure that sample 2 works out okay.

So sample of 1 doesn't mean poverty of knowledge.

Sample of 1 plus theory, conjectural theory, of what could happen.

But I really feel helpless in contributing to this argument because I know so little and my Imagination is limited and I know how much I don't know, and I, but I'm concerned.


Speaker 0: Do you have concerns about the future of AI? All the different trajectories of all of our research. Where's your hope? Where the movement heads, where are your concerns?

Speaker 1: I'm concerned because I know we are building a new species that has a capability of exceeding our, exceeding us, exceeding our capabilities and can breed itself and take over the world, absolutely. It's a new species that is uncontrolled. We don't know the degree to which we control it. We don't even understand what it means to be able to control this new species. So I'm concerned.

I don't have anything to add to that because it's such a gray area, that's unknown. It never happened in history. The only time it happened in history was evolution with human beings. And it wasn't very successful, was it? Some people say it was a great success.

Speaker 0: For us it was, but a few people along the way, a few creatures along the way would not agree. So it's just because it's such a gray area, there's nothing else to say.

Speaker 1: We have a sample of 1.

Speaker 0: Sample of 1.

Speaker 1: That's us.

Speaker 0: But some people would look at you and say, yeah, but we were looking to you to help us make sure that sample 2 works out okay.

Speaker 1: We have more than a sample of 1. We have theories, and that's good. We don't need to be statisticians. So sample of 1 doesn't mean poverty of knowledge. It's not.

Sample of 1 plus theory, conjectural theory, of what could happen. That we do have. But I really feel helpless in contributing to this argument because I know so little and my Imagination is limited and I know how much I don't know, and I, but I'm concerned. You

See all Lex Fridman transcripts on Youtube

Judea Pearl: Concerns for AGI | AI Podcast Clips