Statement on AI Risk • Hacker News Board

Re: Statement on AI Risk

#71

Post by ChatGTP » Tue, May 30, 2023, 1:04 PM UTC

vegabook wrote: post #4

[Un]intended consequence: "AI is too dangerous for you little guys. Leave it to we the FAANGs" - rubber stamped with legislation.

What would Max Tegmark, Geoffrey Hinton, Yohshua Bengio (to name a few) have absolutely anything to do with FAANG ?

They're completely independent AI researchers and geniuses spending their own free time on trying to warn you and others of the dangers of the technology they've created to help keep the world safer.

Seems like you're taking a far too overly cynical position ?

Re: Statement on AI Risk

#72

Post by skepticATX » Tue, May 30, 2023, 1:05 PM UTC

apsec112 wrote: post #51

A lot of the responses to this seem like Bulverism, ie., trying to refute an argument by psychoanalyzing the people who argue it: "Suppose I think, after doing my accounts, that I have a large balance at the bank. And suppose you want to find out whether this belief of mine is "wishful thinking." You can never come to any conclusion by examining my psychological condition. Your only chance of finding out is to sit do…

But what argument is there to refute? It feels like Aquinas “proving” God’s existence by stating that it is self evident.

They can’t point to an existing system that poses existential risk, because it doesn’t exist. They can’t point to a clear architecture for such a system, because we don’t know how to build it.

So again, what can be refuted?

Re: Statement on AI Risk

#73

Post by gumballindie » Tue, May 30, 2023, 1:05 PM UTC

Pushing hard to convince senile lawmakers that only a select few should be allowed to multiply them matrices?

Re: Statement on AI Risk

#74

Post by a_bonobo » Tue, May 30, 2023, 1:05 PM UTC

sebzim4500 wrote: post #61

a_bonobo wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Climate change is a generally accepted phenomenon. Extinction risk due to AI is not a generally accepted phenomenon.

Now it is, when climate scientists were first sounding the horn they got the same response that these people are getting now. For example: "This signatory might have alterior motives, so we can disregard the whole statement" "We haven't actually seen a superintelligent AI/manmade climate change due to CO2 yet, so what's the big deal?" "Sure maybe it's a problem, but what's your solution? Best to ignore it" "Let's foc…

We have had tangible proof for climate change for more than 80 years; predictions from 1896, with good data from the 1960s.

What you are falling for are fossil industry talking points.

We have had not any proof that AI will pose a threat as OpenAI and OP's link outline; nor will we have any similar proof any time soon.

Re: Statement on AI Risk

#75

Post by yodsanklai » Tue, May 30, 2023, 1:10 PM UTC

> risk of extinction from AI

That's a pretty strong statement. Extinction of humanity, no less. I don't get why so many experts (lots of them aren't crackpots) signed this.

Re: Statement on AI Risk

#76

Post by Finnucane » Tue, May 30, 2023, 1:12 PM UTC

Not with a bang but a whimper, simulated by extrapolation from the historical record of whimpers.

Re: Statement on AI Risk

#77

Post by b3nji » Tue, May 30, 2023, 1:13 PM UTC

Nonsense, the industry giants are just trying to scare the law makers to license the technology. Effectively, cutting out everyone else.

Remember the Google note circulating saying "they have no moat", this is their moat. They have to protect their investment, we don't want people running this willy nilly for next to no cost on their own devices, God forbid!

Re: Statement on AI Risk

#78

Post by gmuslera » Tue, May 30, 2023, 1:14 PM UTC

The main potential risks of AI for that level of threat is that government, military and intelligence agencies, and big corporations probably with military ties, arms them. And that is not something that will be solved with legislation (for the commoners) and good will. The problem or risk are not AIs there. And no matter what is see in the AI field, what they will have in their hands won’t have restrictions and probably will be far more powerful than what is available for the general public.

And without teeth, what they can do? Maybe help to solve or mitigate the real existential risk that is climate change.

Re: Statement on AI Risk

#79

Post by ChatGTP » Tue, May 30, 2023, 1:17 PM UTC

yodsanklai wrote: post #75

> risk of extinction from AI That's a pretty strong statement. Extinction of humanity, no less. I don't get why so many experts (lots of them aren't crackpots) signed this.

Maybe seen some things we don't yet know exist?

Re: Statement on AI Risk

#80

Post by sebzim4500 » Tue, May 30, 2023, 1:18 PM UTC

vesinisa wrote: post #53

skepticATX wrote: post #37

I suspect that in 5 years we’re going to look back and wonder how we all fell into mass hysteria over language models. This is the same song and dance from the usual existential risk suspects, who (I’m sure just coincidentally) also have a vested interest in convincing you that their products are extremely powerful.

Yeah, like I fail to see how would an AI even cause human extinction? Through some Terminator style man-robot warfare? But the only orgnizations that would seem capable of building such killer robots are governments that already possess the capacity to extinguish the entire human race with thermonuclear weapons - and at a considerably lower R&D budget for that end. It seems like hysteria / clever marketing for AI pro…

The standard example is that it would engineer a virus but that's probably a lack of imagination. There may be more reliable ways of wiping out humanity that we can't think of.

I think speculation on the methods is pretty pointless, if a superintelligent AI is trying to kill us we're probably going to die, the focus should be on avoiding this situation. Or providing a sufficiently convincing argument for why that won't happen.