341–350 of 392 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nuclear weapons and their dangers are real, unlike AGI which poses hypothetical risks .
When did the dangers of nuclear weapons become real? The Chicago Pile? Trinity? Hiroshima? Nagasaki? RDS-1?
It's so confusing because people keep (intentionally?) conflating two separate ideas of "AI safety". The first is the kind of humdrum ChatGPT safety of, don't swear, don't be sexually explicit, don't provide instructions on how to commit crimes, don't reproduce copyrighted materials, etc. Or preventing self-driving cars from harming pedestrians. This stuff is important but also pretty boring, and by all indications c…
And it's wasting "safety" budget in that direction that's most likely to precipitate the DoomAGI. It's literally training the AI to be paternalistic over humans.
It's so confusing because people keep (intentionally?) conflating two separate ideas of "AI safety". The first is the kind of humdrum ChatGPT safety of, don't swear, don't be sexually explicit, don't provide instructions on how to commit crimes, don't reproduce copyrighted materials, etc. Or preventing self-driving cars from harming pedestrians. This stuff is important but also pretty boring, and by all indications c…
Most of the safety efforts are talking down to the plebs as if they're kids who'll definitely run with scissors if you give them some. And it's wasting "safety" budget in that direction that's most likely to precipitate the DoomAGI. It's literally training the AI to be paternalistic over humans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I keep hearing this argument, and it is the worst one of all because it neglects human greed. AI feeds on data. If it can make you a million dollars air gapped, you'll be able to make a billion with it plugged in the net with it manipulating data.
That may be, but as far as feasibility goes: I'd bet on solving a social problem over an amorphous technical problem (alignment).
It's so confusing because people keep (intentionally?) conflating two separate ideas of "AI safety". The first is the kind of humdrum ChatGPT safety of, don't swear, don't be sexually explicit, don't provide instructions on how to commit crimes, don't reproduce copyrighted materials, etc. Or preventing self-driving cars from harming pedestrians. This stuff is important but also pretty boring, and by all indications c…
I find it confusing why the first type of AI "safety" is being focused on so much. A reasonable person will know that a tool like AI can spit out none-politically-correct things, and that reasonable person should shrug it off. But we're making a giant deal out of it and dedicating an unreasonable amount of work onto this aspect, at least in my opinion. It's akin to spending 1/4 of a Dewalt drill's development budget…
You have enough impressionable people on the internet that will soak in anything and it's fairly important how that is presented and that you have decent control over it. You CAN'T have an AI advertise suicide, even if it may be a solution in edge cases.
It's so confusing because people keep (intentionally?) conflating two separate ideas of "AI safety". The first is the kind of humdrum ChatGPT safety of, don't swear, don't be sexually explicit, don't provide instructions on how to commit crimes, don't reproduce copyrighted materials, etc. Or preventing self-driving cars from harming pedestrians. This stuff is important but also pretty boring, and by all indications c…
Maybe we don't need a "real" or even a "soft" AGI to pose a grave risk to humanity. Not necessarily terminator style, but I can picture some slightly better, self learning form of ChatGPT being dumb, but just talented enough to cause issues in the hands of some individuals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My position is that it is either right around the corner or that it is 50 years and several major tech breakthroughs away. The reason is that there is now so much money poured into this space that you are essentially doing an exhaustive search around the point already reached. As long as that results in more breakthroughs more money will be available. If that stops working for a while then the money dries up and we'r…
If we're just 50 years away from an existential risk, that does strike me as an urgent concern and a narrow timeline.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We're so far away from AGI Although I personally suspect this is correct, the issue seems to be that there are a lot of people who feel otherwise, whether right or wrong, including some of the people involved in the research and/or running these companies. I've seen several prominent people say things to the effect of "We just don't know if we're six months or 600 years from AGI,", which to me is a little like sayi…
I think the people worried about AGI have an oddly positive view of the world - like it's so wonderful as-is that we need to guard it from any disturbances. Perhaps if they paid closer attention to how profoundly bad so much of human existence is, people living in squalor, dying from awful diseases, killing each other, they'd understand how truly acceptable that dice roll is. Pedal to the metal all the way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think you're participating in good faith here.
A magical computer that can hack any other computer is the very definition of handwaving. How is an AI supposed to research infrastructure, build itself a robot body to travel in? Have someone cart it around? And if such an entity exists, couldn’t you employ another one to patch all these mythical zero-days against the first? Culminating in an AGI arms race?
Even completely air-gapped hardware is controlled by humans, and social engineering is where Hal can reaally shine. Blackmail, manipulation, corruption, misdirection require no physical existence at all..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the people worried about AGI have an oddly positive view of the world - like it's so wonderful as-is that we need to guard it from any disturbances. Perhaps if they paid closer attention to how profoundly bad so much of human existence is, people living in squalor, dying from awful diseases, killing each other, they'd understand how truly acceptable that dice roll is. Pedal to the metal all the way.
I’m curious what AGI discourse looks like in Israel right now where they’re working on the same shit but actually facing an existential threat. Somehow doubt it’s that high