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

Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 1001 posts

Re: Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

#151

Post by neel8986 »

greatpostman wrote: post #98

My honest take is a lot of these famous academics played almost no part in the developments at openai. But they want the limelight. They aren’t as relevant as they want to be. In many cases, they were directly wrong about how ai would develop

Really? Hinton dont need openAI to be relevant. He literally invented back propagation. He sticked to deep learning through 1990s and 2000s when almost all major scientist abandoned it. He was using neural networks for language model in 2007-08 when no one knew what it was. Again the deep learning in 2010s started when his students created AlexNet by coding deep learning in GPU. Chief Scientist of OpenAI Ilya Sutskever was one of his student while developing the paper.

He already have a Turing award and don't give a rat's ass about who owns how much search traffic. OpenAI just like Google will give him millions of dollar just to be a part of organization

Re: Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

#152

Post by throw_nbvc1234 »

kranke155 wrote: post #141
stareatgoats wrote: post #137

We are barely scraping the surface when it comes to understanding the future dangers of AI. Geoffrey Hinton is uniquely positioned to point out where the dangers are, and from what I've gleaned from interviews one of his main concerns atm is the use of AI in the military: fully autonomous military robots might not be possible to curtail. The tried and tested method is international agreements. The current focus on ar…

How would you curtail their use when any military that commits to using them will have a huge advantage ? This isn’t like nuclear weapons where any use is curtailed by the apocalyptic outcomes. Killer robots are the way we will fight in the future and any military which refuses to deploy them will find themselves facing defeat.

AI is not allowed to make the decision to kill, that must be done by a human. Having every other step done by an AI is still going to be a huge advantage over non-AI military forces.

Re: Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

#153

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

CartyBoston wrote: post #100
ec664 wrote: post #80

See his response on twitter. https://twitter.com/geoffreyhinton/status/165299357072121037...

somebody has a no disparage

Trying to be diplomatic, but this is such an unnecessary snarky, useless response. Google obviously did go slow with their rollout of AI, to the point where most of the world criticized them to no end for "being caught flat footed" on AI (myself included, so mea culpa).

I don't necessarily think they did it "right", and I think the way they set up their "Ethical AI" team was doomed to fail, but at least they did clearly think about the dangers of AI from the start. I can't really say that about any other player.

Re: Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

#154

Post by sidewndr46 »

greatpostman wrote: post #98

My honest take is a lot of these famous academics played almost no part in the developments at openai. But they want the limelight. They aren’t as relevant as they want to be. In many cases, they were directly wrong about how ai would develop

Going along with that, as long as they are "concerned" about how AI is developing it opens the door to regulation of it. This might just conveniently hobble anyone with an early mover advantage in the market.

Re: Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

#155

Post by ncr100 »

politician wrote: post #81

After reading the NYT interview, I don’t understand why he still chose to invent, in his words, a dangerous technology and publish the results openly. Not a criticism of the man, but of the article.

That's assuming something.

Think about it otherwise: how do you know it's dangerous until you've seen it in real life?

You raise a kid, they end up being a murderer, should you have aborted them?

Re: Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

#156

Post by sorokod »

greatpostman wrote: post #98

My honest take is a lot of these famous academics played almost no part in the developments at openai. But they want the limelight. They aren’t as relevant as they want to be. In many cases, they were directly wrong about how ai would develop

How about this particular academic?

Re: Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

#157

Post by PartiallyTyped »

neel8986 wrote: post #151
greatpostman wrote: post #98

My honest take is a lot of these famous academics played almost no part in the developments at openai. But they want the limelight. They aren’t as relevant as they want to be. In many cases, they were directly wrong about how ai would develop

Really? Hinton dont need openAI to be relevant. He literally invented back propagation. He sticked to deep learning through 1990s and 2000s when almost all major scientist abandoned it. He was using neural networks for language model in 2007-08 when no one knew what it was. Again the deep learning in 2010s started when his students created AlexNet by coding deep learning in GPU. Chief Scientist of OpenAI Ilya Sutskev…

Hinton didn’t invent back prop.

> Explicit, efficient error backpropagation (BP) in arbitrary, discrete, possibly sparsely connected, NN-like networks apparently was first described in a 1970 master's thesis (Linnainmaa, 1970, 1976), albeit without reference to NNs. BP is also known as the reverse mode of automatic differentiation (e.g., Griewank, 2012), where the costs of forward activation spreading essentially equal the costs of backward derivative calculation. See early BP FORTRAN code (Linnainmaa, 1970) and closely related work (Ostrovskii et al., 1971).

> BP was soon explicitly used to minimize cost functions by adapting control parameters (weights) (Dreyfus, 1973). This was followed by some preliminary, NN-specific discussion (Werbos, 1974, section 5.5.1), and a computer program for automatically deriving and implementing BP for any given differentiable system (Speelpenning, 1980).

> To my knowledge, the first NN-specific application of efficient BP as above was described by Werbos (1982). Related work was published several years later (Parker, 1985; LeCun, 1985). When computers had become 10,000 times faster per Dollar and much more accessible than those of 1960-1970, a paper of 1986 significantly contributed to the popularisation of BP for NNs (Rumelhart et al., 1986), experimentally demonstrating the emergence of useful internal representations in hidden layers.

https://people.idsia.ch/~juergen/who-invented-backpropagatio...

Hinton wasn’t the first to use NNs for language models either. That was Bengio.

Re: Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

#158

Post by lumost »

stareatgoats wrote: post #137

We are barely scraping the surface when it comes to understanding the future dangers of AI. Geoffrey Hinton is uniquely positioned to point out where the dangers are, and from what I've gleaned from interviews one of his main concerns atm is the use of AI in the military: fully autonomous military robots might not be possible to curtail. The tried and tested method is international agreements. The current focus on ar…

There is such a blurry line for autonomous munitions. militaries used dumb imprecise munitions for decades - then precision weapons.

A2A missiles used to lock on radar signature leading to huge risks related to accidentally shooting airliners/friendly craft. Now antiship missiles dynamically select their target over 300km away to maximize the chance of hitting a big ship.

During the war on terror, ML models would decide which phone to blow up. We’re probably going to see ai driven target selection and prioritization for fire control within the next few months of the Ukraine war. The US’s new Rapid dragon program almost demands ai control of target selection and flight trajectories.

Where do you draw the line? What would an appropriate agreement look like?

Re: Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

#159

Post by stareatgoats »

kranke155 wrote: post #141
stareatgoats wrote: post #137

We are barely scraping the surface when it comes to understanding the future dangers of AI. Geoffrey Hinton is uniquely positioned to point out where the dangers are, and from what I've gleaned from interviews one of his main concerns atm is the use of AI in the military: fully autonomous military robots might not be possible to curtail. The tried and tested method is international agreements. The current focus on ar…

How would you curtail their use when any military that commits to using them will have a huge advantage ? This isn’t like nuclear weapons where any use is curtailed by the apocalyptic outcomes. Killer robots are the way we will fight in the future and any military which refuses to deploy them will find themselves facing defeat.

> How would you curtail their use

I'm just hoping people and nations might come to their senses. People smarter than me need to figure out how. I'm not going to say that "it is not possible" however, that would be assuming way too much.

Re: Geoffrey Hinton leaves Google and warns of danger ahead

#160

Post by ttul »

RockyMcNuts wrote: post #106

The real problem is the bad actors - trolls, mental and financial strip miners, and geopolitical adversaries. We are just not psychologically adapted or intellectually prepared or availing of a legal framework for the deluge of human-like manipulative, misleading, fraudulent generative fake reality that is about to be unleashed. Free speech, psychopathic robots, adversaries who want to tear it all down, and gullible…

Absolutely this. You can already use GPT-4 to have a convincing text-based conversation with a target. And audiovisual generative AI is fast reaching the uncanny valley.

Since there is apparently no way to put the genie back in the bottle, everyone needs to start thinking about how to authenticate themselves and others. How do you know the person calling is your daughter? Is that text message really from the new bookkeeper at the plumbing firm who just asked you to change the wire transfer address? She seems legit and knows all sorts of things about the project.

Things are going to get very bad for a while.

Post reply on HN