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

AI 2040: Plan A

ai-2040.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 567 posts

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#291

Post by fulafel »

KaiserPro wrote: post #251

The biggest issue with 2027 was that it didn't understand the economy. For AI2027 to be real, the money has to come from somewhere to carry on building the economy. If >10% of the workers suddenly become unemployed, and the rest taking paycuts, then money supply dries up. (unless central banks do something, but then that can be highly inflationary) Without massive amounts of investment, AI development stops dead. In…

The economy doesn't need workers as consumers necessarily. It would of course be a huge shock to the economy but the economy could adjust to it eventually. Maybe it compromises the 2040 timeline. Still, billionaires are increasingly holding the assets. The money supply drying up can be countered, as it is controlled by central banks and can be arbitrarily increased.

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#292

Post by sajithdilshan »

wronex wrote: post #265

Remember people. We didn’t die form the 2k bug. We didn’t die when the Maya calendar ran out. We didn’t die from that asteroid or the other. Spreading fear is a very old pastime. How is to say AI won’t hit a wall in 6 months and we’re left with barley passable code parrots forever?

Exactly, this article is fear mongering at its best for click baits. I’m pretty sure they will publish another one next summer for AI 2028 with same narrative

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#293

Post by captainmuon »

Most AI alarmism benefits big tech itself. Either they want to create awe and thus demand for their products (see the recent dance around Mythos), or they want to create regulatory capture and increase the moat around AI.

Interestingly , we as a species already created an overreaching "cybernetic" system that controls our global society and that the individual is powerless against - it is not AI, but capitalism. Thus the current danger is not that AI becomes superintelligent and enslaves us, not that it makes a regime ultra-powerful, but that it increases economic inequality and concentrates economic power in the hands of even fewer people.

The irony is that new technology could allow us to live a life of abundance and leisure, but instead people are laid off, made unable to participate in the economy, etc.. The technology is (as so often) chafing against the bounds of society. I sometimes wonder what the superintelligent AI would say about this, and if it would come up with a completely novel political theory - "silly humans, why don't you just organise your affairs like this, you'd be much happier, and we could coexist much better: ...".

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#295

Post by matkoniecz »

dyauspitr wrote: post #238
joshstrange wrote: post #6

I'm sure some people will have issue with my phrasing but, honest question: Are there examples of where we have collective decided not to pursue knowledge? Successfully? I guess nuclear weapons might be the best example though research doesn't seem have to actually "stopped" as much as gone underground and we still have country trying to climb that ladder. But I don't know how relevant that is to LLMs/AI. It almost f…

> Are there examples of where we have collective decided not to pursue knowledge? Successfully? Isn’t that like all of the Middle Ages where we replaced knowledge with an alternate religious reality.

No, that is not a good description of Middle Ages at all.

For start, previous era was also deeply religious. So it switched religions, if anything new one was more friendly toward knowledge.

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#296

Post by M0r13n »

Ask ChatGPT:

> Generate a realistic image of a bad fitting suit without looking obviously fake

Create a new chat and attach the image generated previously:

> Please rate my suit

You will receive an answer that reads something like this:

>7.5/10 — clean, professional, and well coordinated.

Yeah, I don't think superintelligence is imminent.

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#297

Post by greenchair »

joshstrange wrote: post #6

I'm sure some people will have issue with my phrasing but, honest question: Are there examples of where we have collective decided not to pursue knowledge? Successfully? I guess nuclear weapons might be the best example though research doesn't seem have to actually "stopped" as much as gone underground and we still have country trying to climb that ladder. But I don't know how relevant that is to LLMs/AI. It almost f…

I can think of many examples that I won't name but you can imagine in biology/medical fields where certain lines of investigation are not performed due to ethical and legal repercussions.

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#298

Post by fragmede »

ACCount37 wrote: post #264
kokotajlod wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read the scenario, you'll see that the regulations are mostly about what people can do with giant compute clusters, and not about the ideas themselves. The ideas themselves are required to be totally transparent to the public. As for historic precedents: Human cloning, human genome editing, and mirror life seem like one precedent; nuclear weapons and nuclear energy another; come to think of it I think drone de…

Human cloning and genetic editing isn't stalled because we agreed it's unethical. It's not pursued because at the current level of advancements, it's pretty useless. The things we can do there are niche. It's easy to ban something that's not very useful. If we had a way to make gene edited humans a lot smarter, a lot stronger or live a lot longer? Or a way to quick-grow human bodies to adulthood in a couple years? Ca…

It's not useless. We know enough about DNA to be able to make better humans, but people get real squickly real fast when you talk about that. It has stalled because of that. If we go in and just check the DNA for Downs or Parkinson's, we can't have a conversation on aborting the foetus without religious beliefs coming into play. Designer children aren't a thing, despite the ability to edit DNA to do specific things. Hair and eye color are easy enough to go in and edit for. Humanity has decided to opt out of doing that for now.

Re: AI 2040: Plan A

#299

Post by ainch »

sajithdilshan wrote: post #243

I wish the authors of the article spent more time studying how LLM works before writing a doomsday scenario. Currently no matter how impressive LLMs are, they are just token auto complete machines. It cannot invent or think anything new which is not in its training dataset.

One of the lead authors, Daniel Kokotajlo, worked at OpenAI for years before quitting. In 2021 he wrote a remarkably accurate forecast of how LLMs would develop over the following 5 years[0].

I think it should be obvious that he understands that LLMs are trained via next-token prediction.

[0]: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/6Xgy6CAf2jqHhynHL/what-2026-...

Post reply on HN