Am I the only one who sees a jumbled stream of barely coherent semi-thoughts and word salad?
[flagged]
There is no hard takeoff
51–60 of 190 posts
Re: There is no hard takeoff
#52He makes a good point. The only real way to "summon the demon" is if AGI is centralized. If each of us has a maximally intelligent AGI in our phone - and it is us as individuals controlling the prompts, then the playing field is levelled. Unstoppable force meets unstoppable force. Gun meets gun. A tale as old as society.
Would every citizen having their own personal nukes make the world a more pleasant place to live?
Re: There is no hard takeoff
#53I am all for AI research and integrating more AI use into society. Currently working on tools based on GPT. I think it has incredible potential to help humans. But at the same time, I am sure that AI does not need to have a hard takeoff to be extremely dangerous. It just needs to get a bit smarter and somewhat faster every few months. Within less than a decade we will have systems that output "thoughts" and actions a…
> We should start thinking now about limiting the performance of AI hardware.
Congratulations, you just ceded the market for AI, and with it any hope of controlling it, to anyone who doesn’t limit it. Like China.
That kind of strategy is doomed to failure.
Re: There is no hard takeoff
#54Related: A similar analogy of 51% attack in crypto to AI-companies https://www.iamnotmj.com/blog/Comparing51ToAI
Re: There is no hard takeoff
#55> Oh wait…every hedge fund bro is already doing this. And most of them aren’t billionaires. The problem is your model needs to include all the computers playing the market, and it also needs to include the other hedge fund bros themselves. This strategy only dominates if you have more compute than the whole market itself, which you don’t. Best part of this article, honestly, I did not expected this, of-course one can…
That argument is a variation of the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH), that at any moment market prices already reflect all information available to the public. Or as the old joke goes, two economists are walking down the street and pass by a hundred dollar bill without picking it up. A little while later one turns to the other and asks "was that a hundred dollar bill on the ground?" To which the other replies "it mu…
This argument (at least the way I am reading), goes deep in uncertainty modeling (Partially Observed Stochastic Games the hardest class to optimize for), stock market here used as analogy more then it is not.
Re: There is no hard takeoff
#56He makes a good point. The only real way to "summon the demon" is if AGI is centralized. If each of us has a maximally intelligent AGI in our phone - and it is us as individuals controlling the prompts, then the playing field is levelled. Unstoppable force meets unstoppable force. Gun meets gun. A tale as old as society.
This is a common mistake in predicting the future. Like in the 90s, seeing that oil reserves are getting harder to find and assuming that humans will run out of oil in 50 years.
Trends don't exist in a vacuum. Especially in regards to technology.
AI doomers are expecting everything to stay the same except capabilities of bots, especially to do bad.
Re: There is no hard takeoff
#57> Back in 2014, Elon Musk referred to AI as summoning the demon. And it wasn’t hard to see that view. Soon, Go agents would beat top humans learning from self play. By the end of 2017, the same algorithm mastered Chess and Shogi. By 2020, it didn’t even need tons of calls to the simulator, and could play Atari too. > AI looked scary. It looked like it was one FOOM away from self playing and becoming superhuman at the…
Westworld aired in 2016, Nolan's other TV show also featuring an AI world takeover plot is a little bit older still. If I had to count the amount of mainstream movie, video-game and television media that feature rogue AIs especially since the turn of the century I'd need a very long document. Hell go back a few more decades, WarGames, the Forbin Project. The literal term 'AI' wasn't as ubiquitous but threats from runaway automation are arguably mainstream for over half a century.
AI fears have been a cultural anxiety for a long time now and in many ways they're just a rehashed, secular version of Golem myths anyway.
Re: There is no hard takeoff
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have any source to back that claim up?
Just look up any serious, non-quacky overview about how it works. If that’s excessive, just consider the empirical fact that we have created it (that’s also why we know exactly how it works), that might be enough.
We know exactly what it does. However, how it actually works we haven't the faintest.
Re: There is no hard takeoff
#59FOOM = Fast Out Of the gate Model, for those not familiar (like myself)
Did you ask GPT that? That'd explain how it didn't notice that "Gate" doesn't start with an "O". Note that ChatGPT has real difficulties resolving words to letters. Anyway, it's not an acronym, it's an onomatopoeia for an explosion. It's a memorable way of representing an intelligence explosion: "AI go foom." (Wild hand gesture strongly recommended.)
Thanks, that makes more sense. I found "Fast Out Of (the gate) Model". Seemed odd but it fit so I listed it.
I did a google search, but I should have realized that by this point they're tainted by AI answers. For example: https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/12bisxu/what_d...
Re: There is no hard takeoff
#60> Oh wait…every hedge fund bro is already doing this. And most of them aren’t billionaires. The problem is your model needs to include all the computers playing the market, and it also needs to include the other hedge fund bros themselves. This strategy only dominates if you have more compute than the whole market itself, which you don’t. Best part of this article, honestly, I did not expected this, of-course one can…
It's the sort of point someone high at at party comes up with. No serious person has ever thought that you can simulate the entire stock market. And the ability to do this is not limited by compute but rather not having the fundamental algorithms that can accurately predict human behaviour.
Not only simulated, but had pending orders on all NYSE stocks both sides, every day for many years.