961–970 of 1001 posts
I’m not advocating for this. ~~~~~~ If you really believed these labs were going to result in the extinction of humanity and you saw it first hand, don’t you have a moral obligation not to quit your job but to go and try and kill everyone working on said project, blow it up, or otherwise stop it? I take these resignations with a grain of salt precisely for that reason. If I worked at a job and I saw some crazy guy or…
No true Scotsman?
"Jacob Coxon resignation appears to be a PR stunt for AI regulation":
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They literally have never promised anything like that. They have explicitly said repeatedly that they want regulation, oversight, nationalization, a global slowdown, etc. And then I have to read page after page of cynical comments about how that's all just hype and marketing and them wanting regulation to block their competition and blah blah blah. You people would only be happy if they stopped all AI development, bu…
> ... They have explicitly said repeatedly that they want regulation, oversight, nationalization, a global slowdown, etc. And yet they do the exact opposite of all of the above. They do everything to get regulation just to create a moat because one doesn't exist. They preach about wanting a slowdown, nationalization, a complete pause, whatever have you... And yet they aren't slowing down the development voluntarily n…
Putting arms race in quotes doesn't make it any less real. It just means you wish it wasn't, but don't have any good evidence or arguments to make.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They literally have never promised anything like that. They have explicitly said repeatedly that they want regulation, oversight, nationalization, a global slowdown, etc. And then I have to read page after page of cynical comments about how that's all just hype and marketing and them wanting regulation to block their competition and blah blah blah. You people would only be happy if they stopped all AI development, bu…
> they want regulation, oversight, nationalization, a global slowdown, etc. > that's all just hype and marketing and them wanting regulation to block their competition I don't see how these two opinions have to be mutually exclusive. Everyone knows that OpenAI and Anthropic cannot IPO in their current state or the economy's current state. It makes perfect sense that they would lobby for a global slowdown to hamstring…
What? Everyone doesn't know that. I predict one or both of them will IPO before the end of 2026.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I appreciate your ability to separate sharing the belief itself from approval of acting on sincerely-held principle. However, I think the danger is much more plausible than you do. First, and least important, consider that self-replicating, solar-powered factories aren't magic; they're algae. Second, and more important, consider this fully non-magic route to doom: - We continue putting AI in charge of more things - I…
But we CAN survive turning off both the Faber-Bosch process and cargo shipping. Our numbers would be diminished, we would lead poorer, much harder lives. But no one would claim that getting rid of modern fertilizers would be the end of the species. But the claim you’re making is that we won’t be able to stop AI from destroying our species because turning it off will destroy our species?
But the species would not survive, if for some reason we needed to voluntarily stop using faber-Bosch in order to do so—it would take some kind of supernatural event to convince everyone, and even then some countries would probably keep doing it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a big fan of the whole Foundation saga, I don't remember any wars in "Robots and Empire" 3 books. Granted, those were the only books I've read only once (and a long time ago), but I'm pretty sure there was no war.
That's fair, the books portray it as a quiet withdrawal from humanity, rather than a war with humanity
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For now let's assume the worst that can happen is that some important/significant chunk of (transitively) internet connected stuff goes haywire all at once. That's probably your upper limit of what can go wrong for now. If we have to disconnect from the internet to stop some kind of mold outbreak, we can't get the weather or transfer money or access healthcare or teach an elementary school class or buy stuff from s…
Believe me, without the internet we can still teach. We'll be pretty annoyed that we can't project the video that we think scaffolds today's science lesson best or show the approved choreography for the school play. And our office staff will be annoyed that we suddenly are all running attendance to the main office old-school. And students will take a few days to adjust to writing down homework in their planners again…
There are offline wireless hdmi adapters, this is a solved problem. Just have to have the videos pre downloaded or offline available
Earlier quoted context omitted.
that it was bullshit and they knew it. GPT-2 wasn't capable of anything other than imitating a stroke victim.
How did they know that people wouldn't find a way to use "the dataset, training code, or GPT‑2 model weights" to "generate misleading news articles, impersonate others online, automate the production of abusive or faked content to post on social media, automate the production of spam/phishing content."? If I remember correctly, it seemed like a plausible outcome to me (especially spam and junk social media content).…
Just wait till self improving AI are focused on the problems of social scoring and political party empowerment / entrenchment. I doubt the focus is OpenAI and Anthropic looking at each other. I suspect they’re racing BRIC.
Will you be optimizing your behaviour now to alleviate potential negative judgement from AI in the future?