Live data from Hacker News

Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

futureoflife.org

31–40 of 1001 posts

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#31
post #3

[flagged]

I don't think laughing at people for their concerns is helpful. Especially when you don't seem to be bothered by the possibility that this is a civilization-ending development.

For the record, I don't think it is, personally. But people are terrified, and not taking their fear seriously and dealing with it compassionately is a recipe for serious, and unnecessary disaster.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#32
A fantastic new tech has been developed that can vastly improve the lives of everyone, and your reaction is to slow it down?

No thank you.

Rather than being afraid of change, embrace it and work to take the opportunity to make improvements for as many people as possible as fast as possible.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#33
post #3

[flagged]

So do you agree that nations should be able to freely develop/discover nuclear production? Edit: We actually don't want people to develop something "too good". There are some things in the past century that have been "too good". Plastics are too good. So are nuclear weapons. Completely powerful AIs and machines that can displace jobs of millions of people are too good. If there's an AI tomorrow that can replace every…

I mean technically they are. Other nations with more advanced abilities also seem able to freely attempt to prevent them from doing so though.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#34
> ... nonhuman minds that might eventually outnumber, outsmart, obsolete and replace us... loss of control of our civilization...

I don't think these concerns are very likely, but I find them considerably easier to imagine than a VC-funded company voluntarily surrendering market advantage.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#35

"Please stop training these AI" is almost comical, even if they are right and the signers are significant. It would be far more effective to lobby for legislation on, say, liability related to the use of AI, data privacy (especially when it comes to training datasets), psycological manipulation, actual AGI research bounds and so on. They are just burning donator money with messages like that, and the research is not…

Is anyone even trying to develop an AGI by the way? I mean a language model is neat, may even pick up some emergent features, but in the end it has no real identity. It's basically a memoryless computer doing improv where it tries to pick continue a conversation someone else had.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#37
post #3

[flagged]

So do you agree that nations should be able to freely develop/discover nuclear production? Edit: We actually don't want people to develop something "too good". There are some things in the past century that have been "too good". Plastics are too good. So are nuclear weapons. Completely powerful AIs and machines that can displace jobs of millions of people are too good. If there's an AI tomorrow that can replace every…

They already have nukes. If a dirt poor country like North Korea can develop them then so can pretty much everyone else.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#39
post #31
post #3

[flagged]

I don't think laughing at people for their concerns is helpful. Especially when you don't seem to be bothered by the possibility that this is a civilization-ending development. For the record, I don't think it is, personally. But people are terrified, and not taking their fear seriously and dealing with it compassionately is a recipe for serious, and unnecessary disaster.

OpenAI's monster is too dangerous to be in peoples hands unless people pay $20pm to use it
Post reply on HN