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

Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 1001 posts

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#401

Post by sebzim4500 »

lylejantzi3rd wrote: post #321
brenns10 wrote: post #234

Reminds me of SBF calling for crypto regulations while running FTX. Being seen as friendly to regulations is great for optics compared to being belligerently anti-regulation. You can appear responsible and benevolent, and get more opportunity to weaken regulation by controlling more of the narrative. And hey, if you get end up getting some regulatory capture making competition harder, that's a great benefit too. Open…

> get more opportunity to weaken regulation by controlling more of the narrative You've got it backwards. I bet OpenAI wants those regulations to be as restrictive as possible. They'll just negotiate an exception for themselves. With increased regulation comes an increased initial cost for competitors to get started in the space. They want to lock down their near monopoly as soon as they can.

I'm sure this is the plan, but I don't see how OpenAI will be able to damage e.g. Anthropic without equally damaging themselves.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#402

Post by bostonsre »

mempko wrote: post #349

Let's not forget, the that behind Sam and OpenAI is Microsoft, a monopolist. Behind Bard is Google, another monopolist. In this context, for major corporations asking for regulation suggests to me they want a mote. What we need is democratization of AI, not it being controlled by a small cabal of tech companies and governments.

Open source is picking up steam in this space, it would be interesting to see what happens if open source becomes the leader of the pack. If corporations are stifled, I don't see how open source could possibly be regulated well, so maybe this will help open source become the leader for better or worse (runaway open source AI could give lots of good and bad actors access to the tech).

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#403

Post by hammyhavoc »

brkebdocbdl wrote: post #350
shawabawa3 wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If LLMs aren't AI nothing else is AI so far either What exactly does AI mean to you?

thanks for exemplifying the problem. intelligence is what allows one to understand phrases and then construct meaning from it. e.g. the paper is yellow. AI will need to have a concept of paper and yellow. and the to be verb. LLMs just mash samples and form a basic map of what can be throw in one bucket or another with no concept of anything or understanding. basically, AI is someone capable of minimal criticism. LLMs…

Is what you're describing simply not what people are using the term AGI to loosely describe? An LLM is an AI model is it not? No, it isn't an AGI, no, I don't think LLMs are a path to an AGI, but it's certainly ML, which is objectively a sub-field of AI.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#404

Post by catiopatio »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #369
elil17 wrote: post #129

This is the message I shared with my senator (edited to remove information which could identify me). I hope others will send similar messages. Dear Senator [X], I am an engineer working for [major employer in the state]. I am extremely concerned about the message that Sam Altman is sharing with the Judiciary committee today. Altman wants to create regulatory roadblocks to developing AI. My company produces AI-enabled…

> regulation should focus on ensuring the safety of AIs once they are ready to be put into widespread use What would you say to a simple registration requirement? You give a point of contact and a description of training data, model, and perhaps intended use (could be binary: civilian or dual use). One page, publicly visible. This gives groundwork for future rulemaking and oversight if necessary.

[flagged]

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#405

Post by vinaypai »

From another article about this:

"One way the US government could regulate the industry is by creating a licensing regime for companies working on the most powerful AI systems, Altman said on Tuesday."

Sounds like he basically wants competition to create a barrier to entry to his competitors.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#406

Post by ttul »

If your business doesn't have a moat of its own, get government to build one for you by forcing competitors to spend tons of money complying with regulations. Will the regulations actually do anything for AI safety? It's far too early to say. But they will definitely protect OpenAI from competition.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#407

Post by haswell »

kubota wrote: post #205
elil17 wrote: post #129

This is the message I shared with my senator (edited to remove information which could identify me). I hope others will send similar messages. Dear Senator [X], I am an engineer working for [major employer in the state]. I am extremely concerned about the message that Sam Altman is sharing with the Judiciary committee today. Altman wants to create regulatory roadblocks to developing AI. My company produces AI-enabled…

You lost me at "While AI regulation is important" - nope, congress does not need to regulate AI.

I’d argue that sweeping categorical statements like this are at the center of the problem.

People are coalescing into “for” and “against” camps, which makes very little sense given the broad spectrum of technologies and problems summarized in statements like “AI regulation”.

I think it’s a bit like saying “software (should|shouldn't) be regulated”. It’s a position that cannot be defended because the term software is too broad.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#408

Post by cheald »

thelittleone wrote: post #392

This feels like theater. Make society fear AI, requiring regulation, so central power controls access to it. I think Osho put it nicely: "No society wants you to become wise: it is against the investment of all societies. If people are wise they cannot be exploited. If they are intelligent they cannot be subjugated, they cannot be forced in a mechanical life, to live like robots."

I agree. Every talk on "AI safety" I've heard given has essentially been some form of "we can be trusted with this power, but someone else might not be, so we should add regulations to ensure that we're the only ones with this power". Examples like "ChatGPT can tell you how to make nerve gas, we can't let people have this tool" seem somewhat hollow given that the detailed chemistry to make Sarin is available on Wikipedia and could be executed by a decently bright high schooler.

"Alignment" is a euphemism for "agrees with me", and building uber-AI systems which become heavily depended on and are protected from competition by regulation, and which are aligned with a select few - who may well not be aligned with me - is a quick path to hell, IMO.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#409

Post by catiopatio »

anigbrowl wrote: post #257
freedomben wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Altman and his ilk IANA senator, but if I were you lost me there. The personal insults make it seem petty and completely overshadow the otherwise professional-sounding message.

Ilk is shorthand for similarity, nothing more. The 'personal insult' is a misunderstanding on your part.

“ilk” has acquired a negative connotation in its modern usage.

See also https://grammarist.com/words/ilk/#:~:text=It's%20neutral.,a%....

Post reply on HN