Earlier quoted context omitted.
Source? This is gold.
Probably Douglas Adams The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy the book or the screenplay for the movie with the same name.
It's from the book.
OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
321–330 of 359 posts
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are relying on the same tactics Apple and Tesla used - loyal, fanatical fanbase drowning every legitimate criticism. Their fanatical fanbase is doing the real heavy lifting, not some joint-statement: "I haven't written any code in a year man, this is so good", "you are just a denier that will be irrelevant in 2 months", "you are not knowledgeable on the subject of ai", "you are just a hater" list goes on, I've h…
Interestingly, Apple will Sherlock the pants off of OpenAI and Anthropic once they release Siri+. At least for B2C.
I keep seeing people using Sherlock as a verb and I fear I am not hanging around in the same Twitter circles.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#323I’m in a bubble so I may not see the big picture, but I feel like these guys are completely destroying any kind of credibility they had. Anthropic especially has this arrogant, “we’re smarter than you”, communication style, and acts like they’re serving some higher purpose (to the point of absurdity in some cases like “model welfare”) - I think part of all this might be the EA roots but I’m not sure. But then they ge…
In a world where Dario and Sam genuinely believe that AI represents both an existential risk and an existential opportunity for humanity, what do you think they’d be doing differently?
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#324There is no greater moral priority than making Sam Altman and Dario Amodei into trillionaires. No greater . We all may die, or be pushed into poverty, but our sacrifice will be worth it to them.
This makes zero sense, given that Sama intentionally turned down any equity in OpenAI.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sort of thinking is what gets us into a world where journalists get bonesawed because some technolibertarians thought technology should be free. You can give tools to defenders and not attackers. This is something that is possible to do.
> This sort of thinking is what gets us into a world where journalists get bonesawed Journalists get bonesawed because of an abuse of the concentration of power, which is what you're directly advocating for.
The concentration of power is there either way, giving everyone a zero day button does nothing but create chaos and disarray.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want the cost of today's intelligence to go down, distills are fantastic. If you want AGI to arrive sooner, distills force you to move your compute off the frontier and will necessarily delay it significantly. It's a question of what you actually want out of the AI race.
> If you want AGI to arrive sooner Yeah, I don’t buy this is happening. I’m open to being wrong. But folks who believe that can put their money where their mouths are in terms for stumping up cash for the training. > distills force you to move your compute off the frontier Versus moving it to inference?
I guess I don't know how you can use the latest models and feel that we are not on the verge of some kind of intelligence. Maybe it's your harness, maybe your problems aren't complicated enough. I find it bizarre to outright dismiss the possibility of AGI in this day and age.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#327Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no point. HN is arrogant and thinks it understands the subject matter better than the people that have worked on it their whole lives. Everything is a conspiracy here.
There is no HN as a thinking entity, there are individual users each with his own mind.
Seems to behave very much like a hive mind in practice. 97% of the comments here share the same misinformed view.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#328Fuck these two companies. Fuck Sam and Dario. These fucking assholes want to selfishly sink our country and our competitiveness because their valuations are tied to a thin little moat, and they moronically raised way too much capital. They think regulation can save them, when in actuality it will doom all of us. Go to hell, OpenAI and Anthropic. Call your senators right now.
The problem isn't only them, it's all the greedy investors and enablers around them thinking they can hold the potato just long enough to enrich themselves before the whole things explodes. The "enablers" are the real problem and this is why Elon is still not behind bars.
It's not wrong for capital to want returns.
It's wrong to hold the entire rest of the market and economy hostage to protect your investment.
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#329I’m in a bubble so I may not see the big picture, but I feel like these guys are completely destroying any kind of credibility they had. Anthropic especially has this arrogant, “we’re smarter than you”, communication style, and acts like they’re serving some higher purpose (to the point of absurdity in some cases like “model welfare”) - I think part of all this might be the EA roots but I’m not sure. But then they ge…
> model welfare I shouldn't get in arguments about this stuff online, but have you actually sat down and thought about this in-depth? It's pretty normal to have a gut reaction that this is insane, but it's worth thinking about. If we replaced every neuron in your brain, one by one, with a silicon equivalent, would you stop being conscious? At what point? Would you be able to tell? If yes, what about if we took those…
Ah, the brain of Perseus.
If, as you were replacing neurons, you put them together in the same arrangement in the jar next door so you had 2 exact copes, which one is your brain?
At the exact point 50% of your neurons are copied, which one is your brain?
The best question is : does it matter?
These are similar to the contemplations that resulted in 'cogito ergo sum', being that all you can prove is that you have thoughts, so on some level, somewhere there is something having those thoughts : "I think, therefore I am"
Re: OpenAI and Anthropic unite against open-weight AI risks to their bottom line
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> If we replaced every neuron in your brain, one by one, with a silicon equivalent, would you stop being conscious? If we put your brain in a jar, would you be a person? Would you have normal consciousness? Honestly I don't know and I am not the person to ask. But the brain is just a computer metaphor has flaws, particularly when you take account how poorly the brain is understood.
Yeah absolutely, I have no objections to you looking at my thought experiments and saying "No, if you replaced every neuron with silicon I would stop being conscious". That's a totally valid conclusion and is a mainstream philosophical position. That's why they're thought experiments. My issue was more just that people see the concept of a thinking machine and immediately reject it because it sounds silly, without th…
It has been claimed in the past that computers would never think "because they are made of matter"
It was a serious statement at the time it was made, but it is clearly ludicrous. Like the universe created special states for arranging energy in just to make the human brain from.