Instigator / Pro

1492

rating

debates

50.0%

won

Topic

#4989

The Rise of AI

Status

Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics

Better arguments

Better sources

Better legibility

Better conduct

After 4 votes and with 9 points ahead, the winner is...

Atoktheadvocate

Tags

artificial intelligence

robotics

Parameters

Publication date: 10.09.2023 12:56AM
Last updated date: 04.16.2024 01:19PM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 5
Time for argument: Two days
Max argument characters: 10,000
Voting period: Six months
Point system: Multiple criterions
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

Best.Korea

1306

rating

299

debates

40.3%

won

Description

In the debate I will argue for the net positive effect of AI rising into efficacy and popularity.
The contender will argue for a net negative of AI rising.

Free debate, any argument is acceptable as long as you argue for your side.

Round 1

Atoktheadvocate

10.12.2023 08:11PM

Pro

Forfeited

Best.Korea

10.12.2023 08:28PM

Con

I win.

Round 2

Atoktheadvocate

10.13.2023 10:51PM

Pro

Thanks for being here.

AI will automate processes that do not need human intervention.

This will allow for humans to focus on more creative endeavors.

There are many tasks that humans currently do that are very simple and take little to no critical thinking.

These tasks can easily be completed by AI.

Eventually, more complex tasks will be taken up by AI.

At some point, it's possible that humans will be able to focus solely on creative endeavors, leading to higher life satisfaction and exponential growth in many fields.

Apologies for forfeiture of round 1.

Best.Korea

10.13.2023 10:56PM

Con

Okay. So no win.

Anyway, AI is obviously going to kill us.

It already kills our brain cells by giving us false info.

I dont see how it can get any more net negative than that.

Round 3

Atoktheadvocate

10.15.2023 07:08PM

Pro

AI only provides the information it is provided by humans.

Any fault of AI is the fault of the humans that programmed it.

In regards to AI killing humanity, humans are much more likely to complete that task than a collection of computer programs.

AI didn't create atomic bombs or cause genocide, humans did.

Best.Korea

10.15.2023 07:17PM

Con

It will make us dumber, then enslave us.

Round 4

Atoktheadvocate

10.17.2023 07:17PM

Pro

Forfeited

Best.Korea

10.17.2023 07:37PM

Con

Since my opponent has forfeited 2 rounds, voters can just vote for me without even reading arguments.

Round 5

Atoktheadvocate

10.19.2023 12:27PM

Pro

Sure give him the win, this debate was no fun, I'm here to talk and have fun not to compete.

Best.Korea

10.19.2023 01:19PM

Con

#10

Well, I am here mostly to troll and say funny things.

Savant

03.08.2024 04:42AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Despite Pro's forfeiture, Con didn't rebut any of Pro's claims or justify their statement that AI will enslave humanity.

baggins

03.05.2024 10:22AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Even though PRO forfeited 2 rounds, CON didn’t capitalize and failed to present anything in rebuttal

AudraE

01.07.2024 05:13AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Even though PRO forfeited the arguments were still better and at the end of the day that's what it's about. Whomever can present the best most cohesive arguments that are still standing at the end of the debate. CON was unable to actually rebut which leads to a vote for the PRO

Trent0405

10.19.2023 05:00PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Better arguments

3 point(s)

Better sources

2 point(s)

Better legibility

1 point(s)

Better conduct

1 point(s)

Reason:

Even with Pro's forfeitures, Con never took advantage of Pros absence to put forth a well structured argument. Both sides offered a pretty simple case with little substantiation, but Pro's case was clearly better thought out. From Pro's arguments, I can glean that humans will be able to outsource many tasks to AI, thereby allowing humans to specialize in creative endeavours. Con's response about the loss of human braincells and the threat of an AI takeover have no logical reasoning or evidence to back them up. Moreover, Pros response to these critiques, that humans have a long history of killing each other, is good enough to debunk Con's idea that greater AI control will lead to more death and suffering.