This philosopher has studied the "prophets" of AI: "Silicon Valley looks more and more like a cult"

elDiario.esIndependentCenterFactual 95Objective 9020 days ago

Carissa Véliz, a philosopher and ethicist at the University of Oxford, discusses her new book 'Profecía: Lecciones sobre el uso y abuso de la predicción' in an interview with elDiario.es. She examines how Silicon Valley has created a modern equivalent of ancient prophets, religious rituals, and belief in the arrival of a superior intelligence (self-aware AI). Véliz argues that while the technology behind AI is new, the myths surrounding it are not, drawing parallels between historical oracles and contemporary AI predictions.

Bias read (Center): The article presents an academic perspective on AI and its societal implications without overtly favoring any political stance. It focuses on philosophical and ethical discussions rather than policy or partisan issues.

Why these scores (Factual 95 · Objective 90): The article presents accurate information about Carissa Véliz, her work, and her views on AI and prediction. It aligns closely with the cross-source consensus, though it includes some interpretive commentary on her ideas. The tone remains largely neutral and balanced.

El MundoIndependent🔒CenterFactual 85Objective 8020 days ago

The article discusses philosopher Carissa Véliz's views on the use of artificial intelligence for prediction, comparing it to seeking the future in the entrails of dead animals. It references Jeanne Calment, a French woman who lived to be 122 years old, and her unusual financial arrangement with a notary. The piece explores human obsession with predictions and how modern technology, particularly AI, has become an oracle for such forecasts.

Bias read (Center): The article focuses on philosophical and scientific discussions around AI and human behavior, without taking a clear stance on political issues. It presents historical anecdotes and quotes from a philosopher without overtly favoring any ideological perspective.

Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 80): The article contains some factual inaccuracies, such as the inclusion of Jeanne Calment’s story, which seems unrelated to the main topic. The focus shifts away from Véliz’s arguments, reducing factual accuracy. The tone leans slightly more narrative than objective.