Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

futureoflife.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#141

Post by kazinator »

thomasahle wrote: post #86
petilon wrote: post #68

> Should we automate away all the jobs, including the fulfilling ones? You don't necessarily need jobs because you don't need money. What you need is wealth. I am going to leave it to PG to explain the difference [1]: Wealth is not money. Wealth is stuff we want: food, clothes, houses, cars, gadgets, travel to interesting places, and so on. You can have wealth without having money. If you had a magic machine that cou…

> Because of productivity gains humans will work very little, and yet live comfortably. Wouldn't this imply humans should already be working very little compared to pre industrial revolution? Instead it seems we work more [1]. And with less fulfilling work. I agree however that we have may have more stuff (or wealth). So going by this projection, in the future we'll have even more stuff, and work even more in even le…

> That is, assuming the people who control the AI/robots are willing to share the wealth generated.

The only way that can be is if you make the AI/robots undocumented and extremely hard to operate, so that even if someone steals your blueprints and builds an exact clone of your robot manufacturing plant, or what have you, they have no idea how to get them to do anything.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#143

Post by ChatGTP »

Fauntleroy wrote: post #22
ChatGTP wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything is out in the open now. The methods, the algorithms, heck even powerful base model weights from Meta. The pot of gold at the end of the rainbow is clearly visible for all. The capabilities are emerging. The race is on. It’s not going to stop till there’s a winner. You laugh but I think your view is flawed because your belief is, “we have to create an AGI because everyone else will if we don’t” The definiti…

Please ask ChatGPT about how to gain consensus from the entire world

I would but I'd have no way to verify if whatever it tells me is accurate.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#144

Post by dougmwne »

zug_zug wrote: post #69

I understand that some people find this a hopeless gesture. But I think anybody who thinks "losing jobs" or "China" is a bad outcome from AI is hopelessly lost. The upside of AI if done right - nobody ever having to work again The downside of AI if done wrong - end of humanity It doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine we've made AIs go from thinking like an ant to thinking like a 6-year-old in a few years. Anyb…

I think considering that we already have GPT plugged into the internet, the general population and any number of economic levers, not long at all. We barely know what to look for as a marker of AGI. Chances are if it’s possible for it to exist we will have let it out of the box by default the moment we switch it on.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#145

Post by BobbyJo »

6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #67

I'm really disappointed to see the HN reaction of straight up scoffing at this like it's irreversible and so let's just step on the gas. It's some weird combination of techno-utopianism and nihilism and good old elitism.

I personally scoff at this kind of stuff because it's asking for something no one has the power to give. It's like asking to stop the development of nukes in the 40s and 50s, it's just not gonna happen.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#146

Post by jimrandomh »

For a long time, "AI alignment" was a purely theoretical field, making very slow progress of questionable relevance, due to lack of anything interesting to experiment on. Now, we have things to experiment on, and the field is exploding, and we're finally learning things about how to align these systems.

But not fast enough. I really don't want to overstate the capabilities of current-generation AI systems; they're not superintelligences and have giant holes in their cognitive capabilities. But the rate at which these systems are improving is extreme. Given the size and speed of the jump from GPT-3 to GPT-3.5 to GPT-4 (and similar lower-profile jumps in lower-profile systems inside the other big AI labs), and looking at what exists in lab-prototypes that aren't scaled-out into products yet, the risk of a superintelligence taking over the world no longer looks distant and abstract.

And, that will be amazing! A superintelligent AGI can solve all of humanity's problems, eliminate poverty of all kinds, and advance medicine so far we'll be close to immortal. But that's only if we successfully get that first superintelligent system right, from an alignment perspective. If we don't get it right, that will be the end of humanity. And right now, it doesn't look like we're going to figure out how to do that in time. We need to buy time for alignment progress, and we need to do it now, before proceeding head-first into superintelligence.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#147

Post by versteegen »

robwwilliams wrote: post #126
dougmwne wrote: post #3

[flagged]

Just hope that there are multiple winners in multiple cultures with different takes on intelligence, meaning, purpose.

Thanks for raising a point that gets very little mention. A tragedy of technology is that is seems to lead to further homogenisation of humanity. (Good for things such as human rights, bad for culture.)

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#148

Post by dougmwne »

wsgeorge wrote: post #27
gedy wrote: post #13

Maybe a strange take, but one silver lining to this is AI models can at least capture the essence of human culture and arts in a fairly compact format. Might be a good "backup" of sorts if the world falls apart.

This is such an interesting use case. Rather can compressing existing information, LLMs "model" it, so they can recreate what they've learned. For all Elon's concerns, these might be a great way of seeding the universe with human knowledge, one planetary colony at a time...

That would be an amazing sci-fi novel, if the concept hasn’t been done yet.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#149

Post by robwwilliams »

zug_zug wrote: post #69

I understand that some people find this a hopeless gesture. But I think anybody who thinks "losing jobs" or "China" is a bad outcome from AI is hopelessly lost. The upside of AI if done right - nobody ever having to work again The downside of AI if done wrong - end of humanity It doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine we've made AIs go from thinking like an ant to thinking like a 6-year-old in a few years. Anyb…

We have no idea of what 27 or 27 million times smarter means functionally.

We could hope that “smarter” might mean “not interested in taking over the world, but rather in help maximize accomplishment, satisfaction, health span, and with a feeling of filial love toward its parents—-humanity, planet Earth, our sun, the laws of physics and chemistry, and the beautiful mess we call biology and evolution.”

Gently achieving those goals would be real indicator of high intelligence.

Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter

#150

Post by versteegen »

usr1106 wrote: post #59
wsgeorge wrote: post #18

That's a remarkable list of signatories.

How do we know it's real? And not produced by ChatGPT, someone who believes to be funny or has an agenda?

Of course it's real. The Future of Life Institute is reputable and run by Max Tegmark. Most of the people I recognise have expressed compatible public opinions.
Post reply on HN