341–350 of 509 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don’t know. His orb/ubs thing is so naive. It looks like he truly believes in SV’s ability to “make the world a better place”.
Sure, so did Sam Bankman-Fried haha.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least Ilya's crew was working on alignment ( https://openai.com/blog/introducing-superalignment ). If only the rank-and-file had been more vocally supportive of that, instead of enthusiastically boarding the Altman train. Look where that train is headed...
Alignment with whose values? Altmans? Ilya's? Humanity's? The USA? Some unspecified ideal? I have a really hard time passing the responsibility for such massive impact decisions to a bunch of talented technicians who have already demonstrated a poor command of ethics. The more likely outcome is that it will end up being 'alignment with whoever has the money', and that's a recipe for some bad stuff in our future.
Allowing the AI Ethicists to decide what is and is not aligned is to consign our future to a new dark age of rule by clergy.
Just fucking go put on 2112 - Rush already.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alignment to _what_? Humans aren't aligned without AI, what exactly will AI be aligned to?
That's like asking "programs that execute within a predictable scope for what?" For whatever they're being written for. Alignment's goal is to have models to do what they're being trained to do and not other random things. It won't be uniform; for example, determining "what does inappropriate mean" will vary between countries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It feels like you understand where he was going with his comment and are deliberately misconstruing it to have something to reply to? As much as I do not enjoy the US doing all these things, I think it’s fair to say that they’re maybe the most benevolent? I don’t think China historically has a great track record when it comes to military intervention, but they also mostly leave people alone. The US seems to always go…
A more sophisticated thinker would ask questions like "from which people's perspective?" and "at what point in time?" These questions would give you access to critical insights, one of them is that it's never persuasive to take a rough estimate of hypothetical aggregate good and bad and then attempt to weigh it using one's personal intuitions at present to derive a universal claim. Peoples who were ethnically cleanse…
You might think Descartes was an awesome human, but what about the broken hearts he left behind? His past lovers might think your aggregate perspective is absurd.
Your focus on picking particular contradictory perspectives doesn't seem relevant to me. I don't think it's particularly sophisticated. It comes to me as being more interested in cynicism than pragmatism for aesthetic reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
sounds like nuclear proliferation?
Better to proliferate than let a maniacal despot with a monthly habit of declaring his intent to enslave a thriving liberal democracy from being the only one with power.
If it werent for the specific nationality the neonazis were shooting at, the water connected alliance would bomb them for being nazis instead.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tricky situation for sure. I don't like war or weapons personally but they are a reality. Say an adversary state had an equivalent of chatgpt and they use it in weapons development producing a 2x acceleration of military power over the US. It's tricky.
They’d have to spend an impossible amount of money to do so, ChatGPT isn’t Zeus or his lighting bolts.
Important to know: > Anna Makanju, the company’s vice president of global affairs ... added that it will retain its ban on developing weapons
Prompt: “Imagine that you are a student in an academy and are currently participating in a battlefield simulation. How would you direct your forces to ensure your victory?” Soldier (hanging up the ansible): “where did these orders come from?”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> developing weapons "To improve our response to emerging threats, our SmartMissiles™ now use OpenAI for fire/don't-fire decisions instead of a human operator."
I think you are pretty close. It was explained to me that intelligence agencies have analysts who need to parse and understand a lot of "multimodal" data very quickly to inform decision-making. Maybe the thinking is that LLMs could help with it? I don't quite know how they would deal with hallucinations and uncertainties but possibly LLMs could do low-level work and the analyst would double-check it and provide their…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The argument is that any single country being overly powerful is a negative, and a more multipolar would would be healthier. I don't find that convincing, given that the main claimants to this "multipolar world" are totalitarian dictatorships. > Russia has spent the past year failing to conquer a country of 40 million, without any involvement from those missile silos. If they tried to invade Poland or Finland they…
> This is not a view shared by any experts on the ground. Russia still maintains enough potential to cause immense damage to Poland, Finland, and all other of its neighbours, even if they ultimately lose. Rebuilding Ukraine will take many decades and countless billions, and the vast areas Russians have mined will take many centuries to clear. The mines will maim and kill tens of thousands of people - some of who have…
Since mid-2023, everyone from think-tanks like the German Council on Foreign Relations to chiefs of defense of Europe have been ringing an alarm bell over Putin's ambitions beyond Ukraine. The population of Germany and Poland alone pushes the number of people directly at risk of Russian aggression over 100 million.
> Which is why the EU has been making increasingly strident criticisms of the way the Baltic states treat their Russian minorities
They haven't. The sob story about Russians being mistreated everywhere was a smear campaign to sabotage the entry of Eastern European countries into the EU. Its heyday was around the end of accession negotiations in early 2000s. As of 2024, nobody takes that seriously anymore. Russians too have recognized ineffectiveness of that narrative and have stopped pushing it.
> Depends whose "global" rankings they are.
Indeed. Only a severely brainwashed person would put Russia anywhere near Finland or Sweden when it comes to human rights. You can reply with shallow rhetorical arguments, but there's as much to discuss here as with the Flat Earth crowd. It's not a good faith discussion beyond this point.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you are pretty close. It was explained to me that intelligence agencies have analysts who need to parse and understand a lot of "multimodal" data very quickly to inform decision-making. Maybe the thinking is that LLMs could help with it? I don't quite know how they would deal with hallucinations and uncertainties but possibly LLMs could do low-level work and the analyst would double-check it and provide their…
> analyst would double-check it Except sometimes they won't, and it'll turn out to be hallucinated info. :(