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

Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

eetimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 151 posts

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#91

Post by entropicdrifter »

idopmstuff wrote: post #89
SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody is going to give these machines access to the nuclear launch codes, air traffic control network, or power grid. That won't be necessary. Someone will give them internet access, a large bank account, and everything that's ever been written about computer network exploitation, military strategy, etc. > And if they "get out", we'll have monitoring to detect it, contain them, then shut them down. Not if some of…

> That won't be necessary. Someone will give them internet access, a large bank account, and everything that's ever been written about computer network exploitation, military strategy, etc. Even if you give it all of these things, there's no manual for how to use those to get to, for example, military servers with secret information. It could certainly figure out ways to try to break into those, but it's working with…

And the problem with this critique of this scenario is the fact that while these points hold true within a certain range of intelligence proximity to humans, we have no idea if or when these assumptions will fail because a machine becomes just that much smarter than us, where manipulating humans and their systems is a trivial an intellectual task to them as manipulating ant farms is to us.

If we make something that will functionally become an intellectual god after 10 years of iteration on hardware/software self-improvements, how could we know that in advance?

We often see technology improvements move steadily along predictable curves until there are sudden spikes of improvement that shock the world and disrupt entire markets. How are we supposed to predict the self-improvement of something better at improving itself than we are at improving it when we can't reliably predict the performance of regular computers 10 years from now?

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#92

Post by kang »

idopmstuff wrote: post #89
SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody is going to give these machines access to the nuclear launch codes, air traffic control network, or power grid. That won't be necessary. Someone will give them internet access, a large bank account, and everything that's ever been written about computer network exploitation, military strategy, etc. > And if they "get out", we'll have monitoring to detect it, contain them, then shut them down. Not if some of…

> That won't be necessary. Someone will give them internet access, a large bank account, and everything that's ever been written about computer network exploitation, military strategy, etc. Even if you give it all of these things, there's no manual for how to use those to get to, for example, military servers with secret information. It could certainly figure out ways to try to break into those, but it's working with…

> It ultimately has to try something & be potentially exposing itself to detection

Yes, potential but not necessary. Think of the threat as funding a military against the military

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#93

Post by Teever »

vasco wrote: post #61
moffkalast wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Logistics tend to be improvable with more inteligence though, no? There is precedence for superhuman inteligence if you look at the best historical polymaths, and that's just what one can do with 20 W of energy. We're probably nowhere close to the universal inteligence cap in terms of physical limitations, if there even is such a thing.

Sure but then you need to manually do the back and forward whenever you hit a new bottleneck. At some point the intelligence might need to figure out better power sources and deliver to feed bigger clusters of compute. Those clusters need to physically be deployed somewhere in the real world also, etc.

Would you ever know if a robotic intelligence was burrowed underground quietly powering itself from the heat gradients and slowly turning rock and sand into more machine?

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#94

Post by idopmstuff »

entropicdrifter wrote: post #91
idopmstuff wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That won't be necessary. Someone will give them internet access, a large bank account, and everything that's ever been written about computer network exploitation, military strategy, etc. Even if you give it all of these things, there's no manual for how to use those to get to, for example, military servers with secret information. It could certainly figure out ways to try to break into those, but it's working with…

And the problem with this critique of this scenario is the fact that while these points hold true within a certain range of intelligence proximity to humans, we have no idea if or when these assumptions will fail because a machine becomes just that much smarter than us, where manipulating humans and their systems is a trivial an intellectual task to them as manipulating ant farms is to us. If we make something that w…

> If we make something that will functionally become an intellectual god after 10 years of iteration on hardware/software self-improvements, how could we know that in advance?

There is a fundamental difference between intelligence and knowledge that you're ignoring. The greatest superintelligence can't tell you whether the new car is behind door one, two or three without the relevant knowledge.

Similarly, a superintelligence can't know how to break into military servers solely by virtue of its intelligence - it needs knowledge about the cybersecurity of those servers. It can use that intelligence to come up with good ways to get that knowledge, but ultimately those require interfacing with people/systems related to what it's trying to break into. Once it starts interacting with external systems, it can be detected.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#95

Post by CrimsonRain »

idopmstuff wrote: post #89
SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody is going to give these machines access to the nuclear launch codes, air traffic control network, or power grid. That won't be necessary. Someone will give them internet access, a large bank account, and everything that's ever been written about computer network exploitation, military strategy, etc. > And if they "get out", we'll have monitoring to detect it, contain them, then shut them down. Not if some of…

> That won't be necessary. Someone will give them internet access, a large bank account, and everything that's ever been written about computer network exploitation, military strategy, etc. Even if you give it all of these things, there's no manual for how to use those to get to, for example, military servers with secret information. It could certainly figure out ways to try to break into those, but it's working with…

You are not being imaginative enough. Lots to say but I think you should start by watching the latest Mission Impossible

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#97

Post by WASDx »

dragontamer wrote: post #76
ethanbond wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember seeing a tweet from an AI guy at Nvidia saying they were using AI for chip layout. Presumably not LLMs and I’m not going back on X to find the tweet, but just to say I think they are doing this (at least experimentally).

The entire field of chip-layout is considered an NP-complete problem. Any computer program trying to solve NP-complete problems is in the realm of what I call "1980s AI". Traveling salesman, knapsack, automated reasoning, verification, binary decision diagrams, etc. etc. Its "AI", but its not machine learning or LLMs or whatever kids these days do with Stable Diffusion.

That's called "Classical AI".

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#98

Post by bluSCALE4 »

echelon wrote: post #74
arbuge wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> provided that the machine is docile enough to tell us how to keep it under control. That part of his statement wasn't accurate. Should be that the machine is docile enough for that, AND its descendants are too, and their descendants, and so on down the line as long as new and improved generations keep getting created.

I like the logical leaps people are making where we develop something smarter than us overnight and then, without further explanation, simply and suddenly lose all of our freedoms and/or lives. I think the more probable outcome is corp-owned robot slaves. That's the future we're more likely headed towards. Nobody is going to give these machines access to the nuclear launch codes, air traffic control network, or power…

You make a long of assumptions here. Firstly, that these advanced are controllable. I'm not convinced we even understand what real intelligence and if we can achieve real intelligence if its even containable if applied to anything.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#99

Post by amelius »

idopmstuff wrote: post #94
entropicdrifter wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the problem with this critique of this scenario is the fact that while these points hold true within a certain range of intelligence proximity to humans, we have no idea if or when these assumptions will fail because a machine becomes just that much smarter than us, where manipulating humans and their systems is a trivial an intellectual task to them as manipulating ant farms is to us. If we make something that w…

> If we make something that will functionally become an intellectual god after 10 years of iteration on hardware/software self-improvements, how could we know that in advance? There is a fundamental difference between intelligence and knowledge that you're ignoring. The greatest superintelligence can't tell you whether the new car is behind door one, two or three without the relevant knowledge. Similarly, a superinte…

Maybe the superintelligence builds this cool social media platform that results in a toxic atmosphere were democracy is taken down and from there all kinds of bad things ensue.

Re: Nvidia Trains LLM on Chip Design

#100

Post by ethanbond »

echelon wrote: post #85
rafale wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could have said the same about every catastrophe that got out of control. Chances are they will eventually gain unauthorized access to something and we will either get lucky or we get the real life Terminator series (minus time travel so we are f**ed)

> You could have said the same about every catastrophe that got out of control. Such as what? War? Climate change still hasn't delivered on all the fear, and it's totally unclear whether it will extinct the human race (clathrate gun, etc.) or make Russia an agricultural and maritime superpower. We still haven't nuked ourselves, and look at what all the fear around nuclear power has bought us: more coal plants. The fe…

We haven’t avoided nuking ourselves by all holding hands and chanting “We believe there is no nuclear risk”
Post reply on HN