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

What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 211 posts

Re: What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

#41

Post by elif »

rwmj wrote: post #40
elif wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct he gave a talk at an academic conference on digital currency and Blockchain in which he described how a Bitcoin transaction works. Here's the article "He gave a Cryptocurrency talk in North Korea, the US arrested him" The slides are (or were?) available. None of the content of his talk was secret or beyond what is published on the Bitcoin Wikipedia page. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/02/nyregion/north-korea…

Going to North Korea and assisting them to launder money and bypass sanctions is illegal (aside from being utterly stupid and immoral), which is why he plead guilty and is now in prison.

It is hardly different from saying "you could put cash in duffel bags and the transaction would be hard to trace"

Is that assistance? It is just a basic statement of fact. Is wikipedia guilty of providing assistance to NK? They provide far more in depth "assistance" to anyone wanting to perform a Bitcoin transaction.

Bringing this back to my original comment, you can see why the federal government would restrict the flow of fundamental technical knowledge by virtue of this extreme case. No source code or application was shared, no secrets or privileged information, merely encyclopedic facts were deemed illegal to share.

Also if you were facing the indefinite assange treatment I imagine you would seek a plea deal as well..

Re: What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

#42

Post by startupsfail »

jazzyjackson wrote: post #37
matheusmoreira wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're not publishing any details on the models for safety reasons! Also would be great if the government cracked down on our competitors because they don't care about safety like we do.

Right, safety is a moat. If you don't meet the standards of the closed model you won't be allowed to exist.

What is OpenAI is right and the risks are real? They likely already have some glimpses of GPT-5 internally. And GPT-4 is closely resembles AGI already.

Re: What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

#43

Post by anileated »

startupsfail wrote: post #42
jazzyjackson wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, safety is a moat. If you don't meet the standards of the closed model you won't be allowed to exist.

What is OpenAI is right and the risks are real? They likely already have some glimpses of GPT-5 internally. And GPT-4 is closely resembles AGI already.

That’s the excuse they’ll use when they convince the government to require a special license to buy powerful GPUs.

Re: What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

#44

Post by Centigonal »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #16
ftxbro wrote: post #4

Say I'm a conspiracy theorist but I'm calling it, that the pentagon isn't letting OpenAI tell the details of GPT-4 even if they wanted to (which they don't except for some of the researchers probably). National security, export restrictions, munitions classification, new Manhattan project etc. EDIT: I know that most people think it's unlikely and I can't give any direct evidence for it. Does that mean it's not welcom…

Just say what's on your mind and don't mind the votes. One thing you'll discover is that you're not alone in your views, whatever they are. Few days ago I came across this bone chilling AI generated Metal Gear Solid 2 meme with Hideo Kojima characters talking about how the purpose of this technology is to make it impossible to tell what's real or fake, leading directly to regulation of information networks with ident…

MGS2 and MGS4 explore ideas about AI, misinformation, the media, and society that are only now being discussed in the mainstream. The concept of an autonomous AGI that generates and filters news stories to provoke humanity into a state of constant division and war is fascinating and worth exploring IMO.

Death Stranding also explores ideas of what it means to find connection in a disconnected world that I think are relevant today (case in point, an article about social disconnection[1] is on the front page of HN as I write this comment)

I think those games are underrated works of speculative fiction relative to how much airtime books like The Diamond Age, Snow Crash, and Ready Player One get in conversations about nascent technology.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35350822

Re: What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

#45

Post by extr »

elif wrote: post #41
rwmj wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going to North Korea and assisting them to launder money and bypass sanctions is illegal (aside from being utterly stupid and immoral), which is why he plead guilty and is now in prison.

It is hardly different from saying "you could put cash in duffel bags and the transaction would be hard to trace" Is that assistance? It is just a basic statement of fact. Is wikipedia guilty of providing assistance to NK? They provide far more in depth "assistance" to anyone wanting to perform a Bitcoin transaction. Bringing this back to my original comment, you can see why the federal government would restrict the…

> Is that assistance?

...Yes? The fact that it's basic and they already know how to do it is irrelevant. The law isn't "it's okay to give them advice as long as the advice is sufficiently generic and obvious".

Re: What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

#46

Post by thatguy0900 »

startupsfail wrote: post #42
jazzyjackson wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, safety is a moat. If you don't meet the standards of the closed model you won't be allowed to exist.

What is OpenAI is right and the risks are real? They likely already have some glimpses of GPT-5 internally. And GPT-4 is closely resembles AGI already.

Then it really doesn't matter, because in <10 years all the bad actors who are interested will have made it already. Might as well let people know that they can't trust anything anymore upfront rather than pretend.

Re: What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

#47

Post by bob1029 »

rcme wrote: post #31
bob1029 wrote: post #26

I feel like there is an emerging consensus that [Chat]GPT 3.5/4 is not just 1 big model. A large part of the magic in the final product appears to be many intermediate layers of classification that select the appropriate LLM/method to query. The cheaper models (e.g. Ada/Babbage) could be used for this purpose. Think about why offensive ChatGPT prompts are rejected so quickly compared to legitimate asks for code. Imag…

> Imagine the architectural advantage of a big switch statement over models trained in different domains or initial vectors. Given that the emergent abilities come from the large parameter count and massive amount of training data, using smaller models seems like a distinct disadvantage .

> Given that the emergent abilities come from the large parameter count

Where can I find evidence of this?

Re: What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

#48

Post by elif »

extr wrote: post #45
elif wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is hardly different from saying "you could put cash in duffel bags and the transaction would be hard to trace" Is that assistance? It is just a basic statement of fact. Is wikipedia guilty of providing assistance to NK? They provide far more in depth "assistance" to anyone wanting to perform a Bitcoin transaction. Bringing this back to my original comment, you can see why the federal government would restrict the…

> Is that assistance? ...Yes? The fact that it's basic and they already know how to do it is irrelevant. The law isn't "it's okay to give them advice as long as the advice is sufficiently generic and obvious".

So your position is that wikipedia are terrorists too? Why would their "advise" be exempt?

Re: What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

#49

Post by throwaway290 »

elif wrote: post #41
rwmj wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going to North Korea and assisting them to launder money and bypass sanctions is illegal (aside from being utterly stupid and immoral), which is why he plead guilty and is now in prison.

It is hardly different from saying "you could put cash in duffel bags and the transaction would be hard to trace" Is that assistance? It is just a basic statement of fact. Is wikipedia guilty of providing assistance to NK? They provide far more in depth "assistance" to anyone wanting to perform a Bitcoin transaction. Bringing this back to my original comment, you can see why the federal government would restrict the…

You made a great point but it's the opposite of what you argue for. Duffel bags full of cash moved across borders are quite easy to spot, not to mention the numbers of people transporting them (along the way stealing some or cooperating with law). That's why dictators don't like duffel bags of cash and really like cryptocurrency.

Re: What we still don’t know about how A.I. is trained

#50

Post by [deleted] »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #13
lovecg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s amazing how one can found a nonprofit with a goal of conducting “open” research and then end up publishing something like this a couple of years later. Greed is good I guess.

We're not publishing any details on the models for safety reasons! Also would be great if the government cracked down on our competitors because they don't care about safety like we do.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN