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

On AI regulation and messaging

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 573 posts

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#391

Post by CamperBob2 »

jacquesm wrote: post #161
traceroute66 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The thing that will work is actually curing cancer. This is honestly hilarious. Dario must think people are stupid. First, cancer research charities are some of the most well funded on this planet. They all obtain donations on the basis of "together, we will cure cancer" messaging. They all fund the best science they can. Second, the human body is a complicated thing. You can feed your fancy LLM as many textbooks a…

> Dario must think people are stupid. All of those guys think people are stupid. That theme has been repeating over and over again.

Donald Trump still maintains a 39% approval rating among the electorate. It turns out that a lot of people are indeed quite stupid.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#392

Post by vrganj »

andsoitis wrote: post #284
vrganj wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The one economically useful thing we will be able to do is legal property ownership. This is correct. But we don't need to ban AI to avoid the permanent underclass nightmare. It's time for the means of production to be owned communally. It's either a cybersocialist utopia or a neofeudalist dystopia. Rosa Luxemburg formulated it pretty well more than a hundred years ago: Socialism or Barbarism! .

> It's time for the means of production to be owned communally. What does this mean in practice? That an individual cannot own a machine (which is a means of production)?

I think we'll have to figure out the details, of course.

As a first intuition, I feel like its mostly server farms and data centers that are the concern, large scale means of production.

It feels right that those would be communally owned, be that via democratic government or maybe some sort of worker owned coop?

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#393

Post by atleastoptimal »

podgorniy wrote: post #66
pu_pe wrote: post #12

> Overall my view is that AI is structurally a technology that tends to concentrate power, for reasons that have nothing to do with regulation (more to do with the extreme implications of the scaling laws). Open-weights do help some with this but are nowhere near a sufficient solution because they simply shift the concentration somewhat to those with the most compute and chips (which are roughly the frontier labs plu…

Swap that point about AI with "electricity". Everything runs on electricity it's "a technology that tends to concentrate power" (no pun intended). The electricity providers must be too powerful... But somehow electricity providers aren't that powerful. Unless there is no competition in sight... The point "AI is structurally a technology that tends to concentrate power" is not that correct. They need this statement to…

The fact that essential commodity providers aren't the emperors of the universe does not imply the same thing could not be true about AI.

Electricity needs transformation to be useful. AI is the transformation layer, a sufficiently advanced AI system could secure an advantage in practically any economically relevant domain. If you have the best AI in world where embodied robotics are sufficiently advanced, you also have the best doctors, lawyers, engineers, logistics network, PR, weaponry, tactical leverage, etc.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#394

Post by game_the0ry »

There were may companies that announced layoffs and cited ai as one of the factors: Amazon, Oracle, Meta, Microsoft, Block, Salesforce, Cisco, Cloudflare, Atlassian, Coinbase, Snap, GitLab, Monday.com.

Both founders of Anthropic and OpenAI have talked about how AI will replace many jobs, and did so with a sense of doom and urgency.

And yet...they are (pikachu face) surprised that people do not want data centers (which will increase utility costs for consumers) and graduates boo tech leaders at commencement ceremonies?

Tech leaders are clueless.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#395

Post by oliculipolicula »

user43928 wrote: post #388
oliculipolicula wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Careful here. This comes close to precisely what dang thinks is a bannable offense https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49175827 Fwiw whenever you come close to commiting a "HN capital offence" I am biased against the mods :) The sbf vibes are on the nose. Remember that it was a big deal that sbf bought into Anthropic, and many if not most Anthropic employees are EA, the tribe of people I'd rather call "rationalizist…

Interesting, I was not aware of SBF's investment in Anthropic. It's not a good look. If you ask me, SBF ran an obvious scam in a sector that is as a whole a scam. With Anthropic's product, I experience a real benefit today.

You would probably experience a much larger benefit after Anthropic's product gets stolen and released on GitHub for free.

This reminds me of the myth of Prometheus. I think most Greek thinkers would agree that Prometheus was the hero, and Hephaestus a complete jerk, even though one was the master of fire and the other merely stole it. Of course they had to make up a punishment for Prometheus so that he could earn his status the meritocratic way..

Probably much against most people here, I separate the product from the person creating it. As another Anthropic example, there was the math guy at Anthropic who disproved a long running conjecture.. it doesn't look like he's getting Fable and Anthropic the respect he thinks they deserve. The process matters.

People are sensitive to disrespect hardcoded in the process, especially against "tried and true" norms, and in most cases they are right. The ability to write satire could be a kind of razor to tell apart the influencers who are likely to be righter than their detractors

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#396

Post by sscaryterry »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #391
jacquesm wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Dario must think people are stupid. All of those guys think people are stupid. That theme has been repeating over and over again.

Donald Trump still maintains a 39% approval rating among the electorate. It turns out that a lot of people are indeed quite stupid.

Go look at Putin's numbers :) None of those number as real.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#397

Post by [deleted] »

kilpikaarna wrote: post #32

> I think it is fundamentally a crisis of trust. I think that ordinary people don’t trust companies, governments, or the tech industry and always suspect that we are cooking up some new way to screw them over. [...] > I don’t think that a glitzy marketing campaign with a positive spin (which some have advocated that Anthropic do) is the way to win back that trust — at this point, saying that AI will cure cancer is mo…

[deleted]

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#398

Post by user43928 »

oliculipolicula wrote: post #395
user43928 wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, I was not aware of SBF's investment in Anthropic. It's not a good look. If you ask me, SBF ran an obvious scam in a sector that is as a whole a scam. With Anthropic's product, I experience a real benefit today.

You would probably experience a much larger benefit after Anthropic's product gets stolen and released on GitHub for free. This reminds me of the myth of Prometheus. I think most Greek thinkers would agree that Prometheus was the hero, and Hephaestus a complete jerk, even though one was the master of fire and the other merely stole it. Of course they had to make up a punishment for Prometheus so that he could earn hi…

I do not think I'd personally gain much currently, other than saving a few dollars by using a third party inference provider.

The Fable quota on the $200 personal plan could be higher, but the difference to Opus 5 or 5.6 Sol is not large enough to gain any real benefit from unlimited access to Fable, for my use.

From what I heard their internal 'Model 2' is hardly much better, but hopefully they will have something newer soon.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#400

Post by dcre »

eloisant wrote: post #146
traceroute66 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The thing that will work is actually curing cancer. This is honestly hilarious. Dario must think people are stupid. First, cancer research charities are some of the most well funded on this planet. They all obtain donations on the basis of "together, we will cure cancer" messaging. They all fund the best science they can. Second, the human body is a complicated thing. You can feed your fancy LLM as many textbooks a…

Besides cancer isn't really "a disease" but rather "a family of diseases" that can vary a lot. Even breast cancer can be one of many different cancers. It's like saying "we'll cure infectious diseases"

I have seen people suggest we will figure out how to prevent all infectious disease.
Post reply on HN