Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI Charter

blog.openai.com

11–20 of 183 posts

Re: OpenAI Charter

#11
to me this is such a waste of resources, trying to build safety for something that doesn't exist and is highly likely to not truly exist for a loooong time.

Re: OpenAI Charter

#13
> We are concerned about late-stage AGI development becoming a competitive race without time for adequate safety precautions. Therefore, if a value-aligned, safety-conscious project comes close to building AGI before we do, we commit to stop competing with and start assisting this project.

Wouldn't it be much more likely that a non-value-aligned project comes close first? Wouldn't the Google/Apple/Microsofts of the world have insanely more resources to dedicate to this, and thus get there first?

Re: OpenAI Charter

#14
At last, one would say: doing extreme AI research at the very forefront (aka reinforcement learning) while letting results available to every malicious party out there? Headless chicken hubris or naive daydreamers, tertium non datur.

Re: OpenAI Charter

#16
I appreciate that they are committed to AI safety, but I'm afraid that researchers have little to no power to, in their words:

> avoid enabling uses of AI or AGI that harm humanity or unduly concentrate power.

AI and technical progress in general already disproportionately serve the rich, as they are drivers of wealth disparity, and I see no reason why better AI won't follow the same trend. Unfortunately, any changes that might affect this are in the hands of policy makers, and they seem unlikely to consider universal basic income or anything as drastic as might be required.

Re: OpenAI Charter

#17
post #5

They didn't even mention several contingencies that, given the rest of the document, should certainly have been addressed: 1) Will they cooperate with aliens who offer humans AGI? 2) If a time traveler hands them AGI invented in the future, will they destroy it? 3) Do they support or oppose human/AGI marriage? How will they respond if one of their employees falls in love with an AGI and they plan to elope? Also, in t…

Is this sarcasm?

Re: OpenAI Charter

#18
post #17
post #5

They didn't even mention several contingencies that, given the rest of the document, should certainly have been addressed: 1) Will they cooperate with aliens who offer humans AGI? 2) If a time traveler hands them AGI invented in the future, will they destroy it? 3) Do they support or oppose human/AGI marriage? How will they respond if one of their employees falls in love with an AGI and they plan to elope? Also, in t…

Is this sarcasm?

It is. I think that given the tremendous success in Atari games and autonomous killing machines, ethical efforts in AI are critically important now, with or without generality. And therefore I find the cynicism above appropriate but less than insightful.

Re: OpenAI Charter

#19
post #13

> We are concerned about late-stage AGI development becoming a competitive race without time for adequate safety precautions. Therefore, if a value-aligned, safety-conscious project comes close to building AGI before we do, we commit to stop competing with and start assisting this project. Wouldn't it be much more likely that a non-value-aligned project comes close first? Wouldn't the Google/Apple/Microsofts of the w…

What, concretely, makes you think that any of those companies wouldn't place a focus on safety and value alignment? Automobile manufacturers and their tier 1 suppliers are the world leaders in automobile safety, after all.

Re: OpenAI Charter

#20
post #17
post #5

They didn't even mention several contingencies that, given the rest of the document, should certainly have been addressed: 1) Will they cooperate with aliens who offer humans AGI? 2) If a time traveler hands them AGI invented in the future, will they destroy it? 3) Do they support or oppose human/AGI marriage? How will they respond if one of their employees falls in love with an AGI and they plan to elope? Also, in t…

Is this sarcasm?

Is the coffee test?

More like commentary from a transhumerist, I suppose.

Post reply on HN