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

441–450 of 1001 posts

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

#441

Post by elil17 »

abeppu wrote: post #376
nvegater wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think by "widespread use" he means the reach of the AI System. Dangerous analogy but just to get the idea across: In the same way there is higher tax rates to higher incomes, you should increase regulations in relation to how many people could be potentially affected by the AI system. E.G a Startup with 10 daily users should not be in the same regulation bracket as google. If google deploys an AI it will reach Bill…

But the "reach" is _not_ just a function of how many users the company has, it's also what they do with it. If you have only one user who generates convincing misinformation that they share on social media, the reach may be large even if your user-base is tiny. Or your new voice-cloning model is used by a single user to make a large volume of fake hostage proof-of-life recordings. The problem, and the reason for guar…

I think this gets at what I meant by "widespread use" - if the results of the AI are being put out into the world (outside of, say, a white paper), that's something that should be subject to scrutiny, even if only one person is using the AI to generate those results.

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

#442

Post by shawabawa3 »

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…

> basically, AI is someone capable of minimal criticism

That's not the definition of AI or intelligence

You're letting your understanding of how LLMs work bias you. They may be at their core a token autocompleter but they have emergent intelligence

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence

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

#443

Post by jameshart »

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…

LLMs absolutely have a concept of ‘yellow’ and ‘paper’ and the verb ‘to be’. They are nothing BUT a collection of mappings around language concepts. And their connotative and denotative meanings, their cultural associations, the contexts in which they arise and the things they can and cannot do. It knows that paper’s normally white and that post-it notes are often yellow; it knows that paper can be destroyed by burning or shredding or dissolving in water; it knows paper can be marked and drawn and written on and torn and used to write letters or folded to make origami cranes.

What kind of ‘understanding’ are you looking for?

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

#449

Post by NumberWangMan »

agentofoblivion wrote: post #432
uh_uh wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't get how the average HN commenter thinks (and gets upvoted) that they know better than e.g. Ilya Sutskever who actually, you know, built the system. I keep reading this "it just predicts words, duh" rhetoric on HN which is not at all believed by people like Ilya or Hinton. Could it be that HN commenters know better than these people?

Maybe I'm not "the average HN commenter" because I am deep in this field, but I think the overlap of what these famous experts know, and what you need to know to make the doomer claims is basically null. And in fact, for most of the technical questions, no one knows. For example, we don't understand fundamentals like these: - "intelligence", how it relates to computing, what its connections/dependencies to interactin…

I'm what you'd call a doomer. Ok, so if it is possible for machines to host general intelligence, my question is, what scenario are you imagining where that ends well for people?

Or are you predicting that machines will just never be able to think, or that it'll happen so far off that we'll all be dead anyway?

Post reply on HN