[dead]
On AI regulation and messaging
411–420 of 573 posts
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#412I genuinely think Dario is a well intentioned, intelligent dude, but I think him and Anthropic have a huge PR problem and are really out of touch with how they're perceived. Anthropic in particular has developed this almost Orwellian like veil of condescending rhetoric that on the surface suggests they're looking out for you while underneath they're taking actions that suggest they do not trust you, Mr/Mrs Ordinary P…
> Anthropic in particular has developed this almost Orwellian like veil of condescending rhetoric that on the surface suggests they're looking out for you while underneath they're taking actions that suggest they do not trust you, Mr/Mrs Ordinary Person. All the safety rhetoric, never supporting open weight models, the lockdowns on harnesses outside claude code, etc.
This line of reasoning is really very silly. I can be looking out for my young child by choosing not to put them behind the driving wheel of my car.
There are both stupid and malicious people in the world. If you have a tool that you believe may be genuinely dangerous in the hands of the wrong person, it is not the smart thing to do to give the public unrestricted access to that tool. Do you think it would be sensible to give every individual on Earth a nuclear weapon to do whatever they want with?
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#413Earlier quoted context omitted.
The effective altruist and longtermist crowd are into it as a religion. They would happily sacrifice anything human to satisfy their dreams of AI. They care way more about what the AI needs than their what their fellow humans need. We will end up with an AGI having better living and working conditions than humans and the whole AI industry will be clapping
It's so weird how distorted your view of any of these concepts are from what these people actually say. I don't think you've ever seriously looked into either group if you believe any of their views support what you say. In fact, many EAs and "longetermists" are explicitly AGAINST the development of AGI.
[flagged]
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#414Earlier quoted context omitted.
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"
Claude cured a deaf person. Just look up news. All this negativity on HN is depressing..
Do you believe Anthropic is going to cure almost all human diseases including cancer in 5-10 years?
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#415[flagged]
This makes him immediately lose all credibility related to common judgement, safety or alignment IMHO.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#416> 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…
> 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…
Third, would it even work? Big Pharma just recently cured obesity, and I’m not sure that’s shifted their reputation very much.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#417> 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…
They should not waste their time on curing cancers. They should waste their time winning the stock market - by doing HFT, market making, or whatever. AI please predict butterfly effect and reap all market money!
Surely it will be quite dystopian future - AI will dictate how the money allocated, where there is only one private company left - Anthropic (as per Dario says)
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#418Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a choice we have, unless you want to figure out a global AI ban treaty. AI will make human thought economically useless. In the new economy, the one economically useful thing we will be able to do is legal property ownership.
No. AI as a tech is not an issue. The wealth and power accumulation in the hands of Amodei, Altman, Thiel, Musk, Karp and the rest of CEO is the issue. Permanent underclass is ideological goal of the above people. AI is an impersonal technology with no goals or wishes.
I'm not sure how that changes anything -- sure, if you blocked people from using AI, it wouldn't have any effects on society, but once people have access, what they do with it matters.
There's an inevitable effect that it has, and the only lever you have as an individual is being on the right side of that.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#419Just want to say, this comment section on this website would have been unthinkable a few years ago. It’s wild: all the engineers have developed class consciousness. I wonder how that happened? Anyway, it’s fun to watch, but remember to stay sane guys, be aware of the pendulum dynamics.
I think the hyper business oriented, technology first view that is what HN typically has been is actually the exception.
Open Source, hacker culture, scorn of "the suits", the love of sci-fi and it's attendant politics -- the bulk of actual technical people have a long history of being very politically aware and deliberately eschewing money for their values. It was rarely Marxist Class-Conciousness type stuff, but it certainly was aware of the political environment we were in.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#420Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Cancer isn't a single disease" is often shouted from the Dunning-Kruger peak of cancer research. I think it was popularized by an explainer video on Youtube, and now it's being memed. The people who think this way want to legitimize funding a particular research niche that they benefit from. A more sophisticated view is that cancer (one idea) is an problem of rates (like most things in biology) and there is a tumor…
Is there something like a meta-Dunning-Kruger, where someone invokes Dunning-Kruger in a way that itself is a potential Dunning-Kruger phenomenon? I'm inclined to believe that the thing - that everyone intelligent says is complicated - is actually complicated. I would be surprised if the thing - that everyone intelligent says is complicated - is actually simple. This is almost like an application of the conspiracy th…
People are constantly Dunning-Krugering the Dunning-Kruger effect