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

Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 508 posts

Re: Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

#101

Post by _heimdall »

elisbce wrote: post #75

I don't understand why people are just mad about OpenAI for their pioneering work towards AGI as if they are the only one who has skin in this game. OpenAI, Google, NVidia, MS, Meta, almost all the AI researchers who publish meaningful work in top literatures, are pushing the boundaries today and has their fair share of responsibility. They are all in it for something, money, power, control, fame, curiosity, academic…

> At this rate, it's already a race to the bottom and I don't believe the first place AGI was born would be able to kill it off. AGI is like nukes, it's so powerful that nobody will take the risks seriously until they have it, and nobody is going to stop pursuing it because everyone else is chasing it. If OpenAI slows down, Google will take the lead. If the US slows down, China will take the lead. That's basically the doomed future we are facing in reality

Its amazing to me that Oppenheimer became such a box office hit around the same time all the AI / AGI hype really built. There are plenty of parallels between the Manhattan Project, and nuclear weapons in general, and real AI.

Heck, just watch the last 5 minutes of Oppenheimer and tell me there's no lesson there to be learned before going right back to work the next day trying to build artificial general intelligence just because we can.

Re: Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

#102

Post by m3kw9 »

elisbce wrote: post #75

I don't understand why people are just mad about OpenAI for their pioneering work towards AGI as if they are the only one who has skin in this game. OpenAI, Google, NVidia, MS, Meta, almost all the AI researchers who publish meaningful work in top literatures, are pushing the boundaries today and has their fair share of responsibility. They are all in it for something, money, power, control, fame, curiosity, academic…

Nukes are made directly to blow things up so I’m not sure if this analogy stands the tests

Re: Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

#103

Post by stefan_ »

camillomiller wrote: post #13

Why do we give this people credit by giving for granted that AGI is somehow magically around the corner? It is not, and everyone’s delusional.

This discussion is tremendously annoying because like the whole "room temperature superconductor" thing, half of it is people who have read far too many science fiction books

Re: Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

#104

Post by aaomidi »

_heimdall wrote: post #93

Paraphrasing a bit, and pulling in other recent OpenAI mews. "We know AGI is risky, and we've stated that while also shipping new products every 6 months. We hope you are excited by the recent announcement that OpenAI is looking into how to allow our customers to responsibly generate erotica, and want you to know that we are doing this with full concern of the risks and potential outcomes. We look forward to offering…

Tf is the risk of generating erotica?

Re: Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

#105

Post by m3kw9 »

camillomiller wrote: post #13

Why do we give this people credit by giving for granted that AGI is somehow magically around the corner? It is not, and everyone’s delusional.

AI alignment is a job so there is negative incentive to make it more than it is. Right now it’s painfully clear it is what’s happening at OpenAI

Re: Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

#106

Post by m3kw9 »

nodesocket wrote: post #18
camillomiller wrote: post #13

Why do we give this people credit by giving for granted that AGI is somehow magically around the corner? It is not, and everyone’s delusional.

I mean you have to think the people who are building it know a lot more than you do. If they are concerned so much so that they quitting and forfeiting millions of dollars there should be reason to be concerned.

So you agree with Sam’s stance since he likely knows way more than anyone?

Re: Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

#107

Post by kumarvvr »

aaomidi wrote: post #104
_heimdall wrote: post #93

Paraphrasing a bit, and pulling in other recent OpenAI mews. "We know AGI is risky, and we've stated that while also shipping new products every 6 months. We hope you are excited by the recent announcement that OpenAI is looking into how to allow our customers to responsibly generate erotica, and want you to know that we are doing this with full concern of the risks and potential outcomes. We look forward to offering…

Tf is the risk of generating erotica?

Generaring porn with children in it.

Re: Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

#108

Post by Analemma_ »

_heimdall wrote: post #97
zer00eyz wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1) AGI is not around the corner, so no worries I agree with this. I no longer agree that the "safety" people want the same things we do. I suspect after the bard debacle a bit back that "safety" looks a lot more like 1984. > He no longer cares ... I missed something Sam was gone, none of these people spoke up, and now they are leaving. I think the story is plain as day but we're pretending it isnt. Sam isnt a leade…

> I no longer agree that the "safety" people want the same things we do. I suspect after the bard debacle a bit back that "safety" looks a lot more like 1984. AI Safety will inevitably look a lot like DEI programs. They're trying to thread a needle with two fundamentally opposed ideas, and with a bit of time it turns into little more than a combination of Cover Your Ass policies. The ridiculous thing is that we actua…

Have you actually talked to any AI safety people? They despise the DEI-flavored AI ethics "make sure it generates enough black people" stuff just as much as you do, and I think you're lumping the two of them together just based on your own dislike, without checking whether that's actually reflective of the reality on the ground.

Re: Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

#109

Post by m3kw9 »

etrautmann wrote: post #19
nodesocket wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean you have to think the people who are building it know a lot more than you do. If they are concerned so much so that they quitting and forfeiting millions of dollars there should be reason to be concerned.

Not necessarily. There are plenty of reasonable perspectives on the current attitudes towards AI safety. Assuming that current employees have a secret they’re not sharing about what’s around the corner is just one of many reasonable possibilities.

Most% of the imagination of killer AI comes from movies, bad incentives and wanting to get attention.

Re: Sam and Greg's response to OpenAI Safety researcher claims

#110

Post by m3kw9 »

MVissers wrote: post #45
camillomiller wrote: post #13

Why do we give this people credit by giving for granted that AGI is somehow magically around the corner? It is not, and everyone’s delusional.

If you look at compute scaling and model improvement on that compute, we’re going to get there pretty fast. Both compute, architecture and cost matter, and those have been improving like crazy. I don’t know about you, but I didn’t expect GPT-4o to come out at half the price one year later, with real-time voice, image and text. There is zero sign of slowing, Nvidia keeps building beefier GPUs specialized in LLMs, the…

Even sam says they are 2 breakthroughs before AGI is possible. Who knows how difficult they are to make that leap. Humans are still highly capable comparing to LLMs
Post reply on HN