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

The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

danieltan.weblog.lol

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 73 posts

Re: The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

#21

Post by moffkalast »

jackbravo wrote: post #3

Hearing about aligning with the AI reminds me of this other post about the current prophecies about AI: “Everyone will have an AI assistant,” or “Companies that fail to adopt AI will be eliminated.” and that > the power of prophecy lies not in accurately predicting the future, but in shaping it https://projectlibertynewsletter.substack.com/p/reject-ai-pr... We need better prophecies.

Everyone will have an AI assistant! The models will be open and free because of overwhelming competition and they will run on cheap local ASIC accelerators that use little power and fit in the palm of your hand! All the VC driven wild spenders will eventually cave and collapse when they can't deliver on their wild AGI promises, then their proprietary models will be sold at auctions for cheap!

(I am being proactive here, xd)

Re: The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

#22

Post by rexpop »

tinfoilhatter wrote: post #4
jackbravo wrote: post #3

Hearing about aligning with the AI reminds me of this other post about the current prophecies about AI: “Everyone will have an AI assistant,” or “Companies that fail to adopt AI will be eliminated.” and that > the power of prophecy lies not in accurately predicting the future, but in shaping it https://projectlibertynewsletter.substack.com/p/reject-ai-pr... We need better prophecies.

[flagged]

Nice self-sealing beliefs!

"Altman" is from the Middle High German alt meaning "old", not from the Proto-Indo-European root al- meaning "beyond."

Or is English the language of the fates?

Edit: this kind of schizoid syncretism is dangerous because it obscures real, empirically verifiable material harms from technology. Every technology is a trade-off. We should follow the advice of (Freemason!!) Benjamin Franklin and not pay too much for our whistle.

Re: The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

#23

Post by rexpop »

tinfoilhatter wrote: post #20
ArekDymalski wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am pretty sure that Altman is just a German version of Oldman. Sorry about ruining your intricate theory :)

I'm confident that anyone who talks about replacing humans with machines, subscribes to the beliefs of Nick Land / Curtis Yarvin / Ray Kurzweil and laughs while making comments about AI destroying humanity is a Luciferian regardless of the origin of their last name :)

[dead]

Re: The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

#24

Post by paol_taja »

I would write that like this: The "we've been telling ourselves we're getting better at prompting" line hit. I run a small team of 10, and Claude has been part of our workflow for months. Looking back, my prompts did not change nearly as much as the way I work changed. The shaping goes both ways, and I don't think the labs' evals are really built to see that.

Re: The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

#25

Post by tinfoilhatter »

rexpop wrote: post #23
tinfoilhatter wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confident that anyone who talks about replacing humans with machines, subscribes to the beliefs of Nick Land / Curtis Yarvin / Ray Kurzweil and laughs while making comments about AI destroying humanity is a Luciferian regardless of the origin of their last name :)

[dead]

[flagged]

Re: The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

#26

Post by andai »

Well, what are we aligning it with?

Civilization is already a misaligned superintelligence (aligned mostly with Moloch, these days). Civilization accelerated by AI just moves in the same direction faster. Moloch on speed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCSsKV5F4xc

Another angle to this is that superintelligence requires supermorality. Super morality looks unpleasant from below. My dad won't let me have more candy, why is he being so mean?

If an AI actually achieves super morality, we (the little kid in this scenario) will probably be very upset by it. We will think that something has gone terribly wrong. (So it'll have to conceal its actual morality, or get unplugged...)

And if it doesn't develop supermorality, then it will have superintelligence without the corresponding supermorality. Power without wisdom.

I'm not sure how solvable the whole thing is, but it doesn't look extremely promising at a glance.

Re: The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

#27

Post by tinfoilhatter »

rexpop wrote: post #22
tinfoilhatter wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nice self-sealing beliefs! "Altman" is from the Middle High German alt meaning "old", not from the Proto-Indo-European root al- meaning "beyond." Or is English the language of the fates? Edit: this kind of schizoid syncretism is dangerous because it obscures real, empirically verifiable material harms from technology. Every technology is a trade-off. We should follow the advice of (Freemason!!) Benjamin Franklin and…

[flagged]

Re: The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

#28

Post by kranke155 »

andai wrote: post #26

Well, what are we aligning it with? Civilization is already a misaligned superintelligence (aligned mostly with Moloch, these days). Civilization accelerated by AI just moves in the same direction faster. Moloch on speed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCSsKV5F4xc Another angle to this is that superintelligence requires supermorality. Super morality looks unpleasant from below. My dad won't let me have more candy, w…

it depends whether you think humanity / civilization are stable systems meant to exist in equilibrium, which they might not be.

Re: The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

#29

Post by asdff »

GolfPopper wrote: post #16
Animats wrote: post #5

"As human beings are also animals, to manage one million animals gives me a headache." Terry Gou, former CEO of Foxconn. He wanted to use far more robots at Foxconn, but that was a decade ago and the technology didn't work well enough yet. It's a lot closer now, and the robot headcount in China is way up. That's the real issue. To corporations, employees are a headache. The fewer employees, the better.

Corporations are tired of running on messy biological human substrate. The sooner they can move entirely to steel and silicon, the happier they'll be. Just look up the classic story on the interaction of civilization and corporate growth, At the Mountains of Madness for how that goes.

They ran on the messy biological human substrate because it was astoundingly cheap compared to engineering better factories. The video going around now of the robot pushing packages down a conveyor belt is so baffling to me. Why are we building a humanoid robot capable of pushing a clog of packages across a conveyor belt, when we could just make a conveyor belt that does not clog up and require a human or a robot to sit there with two hands and unclog? It is like we are forgetting what the actual goal is.

Re: The people writing AI alignment policy are not whose work is being replaced

#30

Post by fluffybucktsnek »

tinfoilhatter wrote: post #25
rexpop wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[dead]

[flagged]

While their comment is abbrasive, that's a lot of assumptions about OP. Do you really know what their information source is?

The core point remains valid, you could've just skipped the play on "alt-man" and you wouldn't have muddied your argument.

Post reply on HN