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

471–480 of 508 posts

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

#471

Post by AlbertCory »

ToastWithShrimp wrote: post #360
AlbertCory wrote: post #267

some telltale word smells of CorpSpeak BS. Where's Orwell when we need him? "putting in place the foundations" "keep elevating our safety work" "As models continue to become much more capable" mindless throat-clearing. In fact, beginning a sentence or phrase with "as" is classic CorpSpeak "a very tight feedback loop" "We are also continuing to collaborate with governments and many stakeholders " anytime anyone says t…

What else did you expect?

I didn't. I haven't read much of anything he's written. But people who write like that are generally incapable of any clear, concise words, so it's best to just ignore them.

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

#472

Post by verisimi »

shinycode wrote: post #348
verisimi wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Re 1 - aren't people mostly doing bullshit jobs already? Re 2 - fakery in videos and images has been a part since their inception. So, don't worry, I guess? The only thing is the scale of bs that could be put out, and whether the wider population lose trust in what they see on screens. Which would be a good thing, imo.

Bullshit jobs yes but still they are paid. What happens in a capitalist society when thousands of people loose their job and can’t produce value and contribute to society ? It’s tearing apart the fabric of capitalism is some way. What happen when all those people without jobs won’t be able to train for better jobs (because they would have done it already and won’t have a bullshit job in the first place) and either fa…

I'm not saying that people won't be paid or that jobs will disappear. I'm saying it's easy to create new jobs.

Here are some ideas:

Increase bureaucratic overhead, eg 3 years mandatory training for a licensed hairdresser. More forms, more delays. Require that a plumber has a plumber's mate. Require in person meetings to avoid fraud. Etc.

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

#473

Post by nathanasmith »

llamaimperative wrote: post #387
nathanasmith wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're about as close to AGI as we are to developing superluminal space flight and working time machines.

Umm, no. We can point to concrete mathematical and empirical evidence of those two things being impossible. Point to the physical laws that indicate AGI or superintelligence is impossible or even maybe-impossible. No such laws exist.

[flagged]

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

#474

Post by lolinder »

guardiang wrote: post #257
lolinder wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't like climate change. "AI" is a successful marketing term for a loosely related collection of technologies that push the boundaries of what computation has hitherto been capable of. There are very real disagreements between very real experts on just how dangerous these new technologies are and just how far they'll actually be able to push the boundaries of computation. Comparing skepticism about AI alarmism…

Large Language Models are no joke and if you think they are the I suggest you learn how to use them properly. Even if AI doesn't ever go "evil" itself, that doesn't mean people that don't like other people won't use it to more effectively kill those people. All that's really needed is a capable programmer willing to give the LLM the tools it needs, along with funds and access. The LLM could hire humans to do the work…

> If you don't think they are scary, in the wrong hands, then you are lacking in imagination.

Imagination is a great resource to apply to writing a sci-fi novel. When it comes time to actually predict the future, imagination should be tempered with a solid understanding of the technology and a good understanding of history. Neither of those resources persuades me that AI poses "the greatest of dangers".

> Even if AI doesn't ever go "evil" itself, that doesn't mean people that don't like other people won't use it to more effectively kill those people.

This I can absolutely see happening, but I don't see LLMs being even in the top ten most dangerous technologies we've invented for more efficient killing. It's a big enough risk that people working on the tech should seriously consider the ethical implications, but not big enough that the rest of us need to lose sleep over it.

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

#475

Post by lolinder »

iudqnolq wrote: post #413
throwaway346434 wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's your misconception here - thinking it's one of billions. You have lived with spam and phishing emails your whole life. It's clearly not one bad actor alone, but by the same token it's not everyone in existence. Only what used to be one person running a scam is now one person running 10,000 automations to run a scam. Now make the automations more effective by 10%. And that's the problem you don't even seem to r…

We started talking about the end of the world. Now we're talking about an increase in spam emails. I couldn't care less. Spam calls in the USA skyrocketed in the past decade and society didn't end.

Exactly. There's so much goal post shifting happening in this thread it's absurd. We call out someone for hyperbolizing and saying that AI poses "the greatest of dangers", and people rush to criticize us for saying that AI won't change anything. Talk about a motte and bailey.

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

#476

Post by pests »

jonathankoren wrote: post #88
pests wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he has no financial interest in OpenAI I think that's true though? He has an interest in HN, which has an interest in OAI.

HN? Don’t you mean YC?

Yeah yeah of course, the two blend into one in my mind. Apologies.

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

#477

Post by krainboltgreene »

gverrilla wrote: post #386
krainboltgreene wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AGI is not around the corner, so no worries Unfortunately while this is very likely the case, the vast amount of money being poured into these projects will also seep into other horrifying projects like: Lavender or Pattern (seriously go look up both of these, it's actually going to fry your brain).

Brain not fried. Why do you think these projects are horrifying?

Weird thing to joke about.

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

#478

Post by euroderf »

tempodox wrote: post #458
sensanaty wrote: post #430

The talk of AI exterminating us via paperclips is an annoying one to me that detracts from the real dangers that are currently unfolding: - scammers are having the time of their lives, and their capabilities are only going to get better and easier - people are actively getting dumber as they trust the hallucinated outputs blindly - regular communication is starting to break down because you can't trust that people ar…

> I do believe it's going to replace every single person's job… Some may try to make that so, but since LLMs perform badly with anything that has to be ground in facts and actual reality, the hype wave will die down soon enough. When the point of a job is to generate the most amount of bullshit as quickly as possible, LLMs will excel.

So, marketing as a profession is endangered.

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

#479

Post by Phoenix5869 »

dijksterhuis wrote: post #282
Phoenix5869 wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was a marketing campaign. > it was never a serious thing Yeppppp. This is what i was saying for weeks and weeks, if not months. The amount of people on Reddit who can not see the puzzle pieces of “OpenAI sells AI” , “AI is hyped” , “more hype = more attention = more money and media coverage” and put them together, is actually shocking. Every time i would point this out on Reddit, more often than not i would get…

I find there can be significant cargo culting [0] on HN too when any of these topics hit the front page: OpenAI / ChatGPT / LLMs; Zoom; E2EE; regulation / policy; crypto currency / NFTs [1] etc. That said, I’m kind of glad to hear that Reddit is worse, as it puts the situation here on HN into some wider perspective (it’s not that bad here). [0]: meant in the form of: closed minded absolutism without full contextual a…

Yeah, Reddit is pretty bad when it comes to trying to have well reasoned discussions with people.

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

#480

Post by hnlmorg »

naijaboiler wrote: post #425
hnlmorg wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “computers are replacing our jobs” line is very emotive and I feel both sides of the argument are looking at the problem too binary. Yes some jobs are menial but they are still some people’s literal livelihoods. And yes, industries need to evolve and job preservation shouldn’t be the #1 criteria for holding back change. The real question we should be asking ourselves isn’t either of those two former points but ac…

Humans can never run out of economic activities we call for each other. Period!

I don’t understand what you’re trying to say there.
Post reply on HN