Well that's certainly a vibe.
AI 2040 and the cult of intelligence
231–240 of 280 posts
Re: AI 2040 and the cult of intelligence
#232I get what the author is saying, but they may want to consider saying it in a slightly more compelling way, that has a logical flow that doesn't end with the reader thinking, "Why should AI help me cover-up a murder?"
Because in gun free zones the only people that suffer are the ones that follow the rules.
Re: AI 2040 and the cult of intelligence
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ChatGPT will indeed flag your account Oh no, I'll have to spin up a new e-mail address...
And prove you're not a child by handing over your ID or selfie to a company that Values Your Privacy according to their price list. Microsoft will snitch your Windows install GUID when you connect through a VPN. If you make your connection too anonymous, Google's recaptcha will not let your through until you use your mobile phone to prove your humanity, which knows your phone number (which in many countries can't be…
"... prove you're not a child by handing over your ID ..."
Anecdote: I just created an API access account at openAI, for a business I own, two weeks ago, with no identification check of any kind.
No human name is anywhere on the account.
Re: AI 2040 and the cult of intelligence
#234> Like we either live in a world with freedom or we don’t, and like many Americans who have come before, I’m willing to give my life to fighting for it. This is a very simplistic view. "Freedom" isn't binary. In most of "land of the free", I can't even sit on a park bench and drink a can of beer. Yes, this is just a small example of a personal freedom - and not an important, cherished freedom like his examples (freed…
> In most of "land of the free", I can't even sit on a park bench and drink a can of beer. Freedom doesn’t mean you get to do whatever you want with property that isn’t yours. You can sit on your own bench on your own property and drink a beer. The people of the city can decide that they don’t want people using the taxpayer funded public benches used for that. Other cities do allow it. But freedom doesn’t mean anyone…
I have complex feelings about this subject, but if you can't stop yourself from leaning on "absolute freedom is the only correct option", you're going to have to make sure you're not making the mistake of thinking "absolute freedom" is "some specific balance of freedoms and constraints"
Re: AI 2040 and the cult of intelligence
#235I get what the author is saying, but they may want to consider saying it in a slightly more compelling way, that has a logical flow that doesn't end with the reader thinking, "Why should AI help me cover-up a murder?"
Because in gun free zones the only people that suffer are the ones that follow the rules.
I'm about as pro second amendment as they come, and that was not at all the message I got reading that blog post.
I guess my point stands. They should work on their delivery.
Re: AI 2040 and the cult of intelligence
#236> Like we either live in a world with freedom or we don’t, and like many Americans who have come before, I’m willing to give my life to fighting for it. That’s the real plan America deserves, not some totalitarian dystopia where you think you know what’s good for me better than I do. A nation of free men, not a bunch of pussies who are so worried about what their grown up neighbors might do.
Absolutely yuck. Regardless of whatever other points were made, “A nation of free men, not a bunch of pussies” is a disgusting thing to say.
I actually do believe that prior to any intelligence explosion, a proliferation of strong local models is the best of all the not necessarily great options regarding the future of AI. So in this sense I am in agreement with some of what he’s saying, and for some of the same reasons - not trusting government or a small handful of large corporations to own it, primarily.
But to equate a thoughtful argument for regulation with cowardice, in the face of real unknowns and real dangers - and to use a really gross term for it - ruins his points.
Re: AI 2040 and the cult of intelligence
#237What a provocative and brilliant way to prove misalignment. It will fall on deaf ears for most but it’s a great litmus test for all: “in your opinion should your AI be permitted to tell you how to cover up a murder?”
If you say you're doing research for a novel, should it consider that plausible? How much does it need to know about its users to vet them? I think part of the answer is that AI chat doesn't need to be general-purpose. It turned out that people really liked using a chat UI that seems to be general purpose, but you don't need to make answering any question a user asks your business. You don't need to provide therapy i…
> I think part of the answer is that AI chat doesn't need to be general-purpose. It turned out that people really liked using a chat UI that seems to be general purpose, but you don't need to make answering any question a user asks your business.
I was under the impression that the lack of specialization is an aspect of the models themselves, not merely the UI or harnesses.
For example, the recent OpenAI success in a mathematics proof was accomplished with a general purpose model [0].
> The proof came from a new general-purpose reasoning model, rather than from a system trained specifically for mathematics, scaffolded to search through proof strategies, or targeted at the unit distance problem in particular.
Once the model is trained on general purpose data, specialization is just another kind of guardrail, as vulnerable to “jailbreaking” or prompt injection as any other content-based restriction.
[0] https://openai.com/index/model-disproves-discrete-geometry-c...
Re: AI 2040 and the cult of intelligence
#238> Like we either live in a world with freedom or we don’t, and like many Americans who have come before, I’m willing to give my life to fighting for it. This is a very simplistic view. "Freedom" isn't binary. In most of "land of the free", I can't even sit on a park bench and drink a can of beer. Yes, this is just a small example of a personal freedom - and not an important, cherished freedom like his examples (freed…
> In most of "land of the free", I can't even sit on a park bench and drink a can of beer. Freedom doesn’t mean you get to do whatever you want with property that isn’t yours. You can sit on your own bench on your own property and drink a beer. The people of the city can decide that they don’t want people using the taxpayer funded public benches used for that. Other cities do allow it. But freedom doesn’t mean anyone…
Complete freedom actually would mean that you can do whatever you want anywhere. You're really just arguing that complete freedom is bad (and that's a very agreeable point), but there's no need to skew definitions just because the culture says "freedom generally = good"
Re: AI 2040 and the cult of intelligence
#239I love it. Put the guardrails on the human. Your self driving car crashes? Straight to jail with you Mr Musk. Your AI is generating CSAM, straight to jail with all the pedos!
Recognise the safety and guardrails BS for what it is. An elaborate smoke and mirrors to get out of responsibility and liability.
Re: AI 2040 and the cult of intelligence
#240start first with securing your own food without govenrment nor employer. then start talking about freedom.
What’s your point? He’s not arguing for anarchism. He’s arguing there are some areas of life that are best left ungovernable and up to individuals to decide. It’s not an all-or-nothing situation. Every constitution out there carves out such areas.
my point is: any talk of "freedom" when you are a corporate slave or living on government handouts is nonsense
it is all wannabe lemon-stand freedom.