Live data from Hacker News

We must pace the frontier

darioamodei.com

261–270 of 937 posts

Re: We must pace the frontier

#261

I know the common take online is that this is Anthropic doing pre-IPO marketing. I don’t think it is. I think Dario is genuinely afraid of the inevitability of AI turning into internet slime mold: consuming the environment, turning it into its own playground, and eventually manipulating human culture along with it. So am I. That said, if slowing this down were possible, I think it would have happened by now. Maybe he…

> The fundamental problem is simpler: no one will slow down because no one trusts anyone else to slow down.

Did you read the essay?

> [Embedded evaluators] is something Anthropic is unilaterally committing to (and calls on governments to require other frontier companies to match).

Re: We must pace the frontier

#262

I know the common take online is that this is Anthropic doing pre-IPO marketing. I don’t think it is. I think Dario is genuinely afraid of the inevitability of AI turning into internet slime mold: consuming the environment, turning it into its own playground, and eventually manipulating human culture along with it. So am I. That said, if slowing this down were possible, I think it would have happened by now. Maybe he…

The more I read about everything that has been written regarding AI regulation since the OAI/HF incident, and the more it reminds me of the nuclear arms race (although the potential consequences would possibly be very different). Surely, we managed to negotiate a Non-Proliferation Treaty with most of the countries of the globe. Cannot we take inspiration from that for AI?

It might help if we stopped talking about AI as if it is itself responsible for its actions and excusing the humans who create and operate it. People should be held accountable for the behaviour of their software.

Why am I reading fantastic stories about swarms of agents struggling with moral dilemmas instead of reports on the lawsuits and criminal investigations that would surely ensue were the software involved not called AI?

Re: We must pace the frontier

#263
post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example I believe the world would be more secure with an open frontier AI lab, but the consequences of him doing that are too big for him.

You mean, if Anthropic made all of their models open-weights from now on? I'm pretty sure Dario thinks this will be extremely un safe, because it'd provide unrestricted access to all the most capable/dangerous models to everyone, and hence doesn't do it. Why do you think it'd make the world more secure, if he did?

AI technology is now only audited by people who think like them. The ones that dont either dont join the company, or leave after a short stint as we have seen. That creates an information or feedback bubble which is not healthy nor productive.

Re: We must pace the frontier

#264

I know the common take online is that this is Anthropic doing pre-IPO marketing. I don’t think it is. I think Dario is genuinely afraid of the inevitability of AI turning into internet slime mold: consuming the environment, turning it into its own playground, and eventually manipulating human culture along with it. So am I. That said, if slowing this down were possible, I think it would have happened by now. Maybe he…

> That said, if slowing this down were possible, I think it would have happened by now. Maybe he’s hoping the OAI/HF incident becomes something the industry can rally around, but it won’t.

I disagree with this and I think the reason is well captured here:

> The idea of pausing or slowing AI has been floated as far back as 2023, and I think it made little sense back then... The AI models of those days were not powerful enough to act as agents in the world in any coherent way, and were not capable of significant deception, manipulation, cheating, or cyberattacks... Today, however, the picture is totally different.

Re: We must pace the frontier

#265
post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like to replace thes AI text with "virus manipulation" "Given the acceleratung rate of virus manipulation in labs, its my worry that in 6-12 months a virus could scape a take over the world and collapse health systems." If a CEO of a health company was saying this, the reactions would not be that chill. The worst failure of our society is to call this technology AI, intead of something line "artificial general auto…

A rather unfair comparison. The whole calculus here is that others are also developing these systems which has led to a race. A much better comparison to the situation is the nuclear weapons arms race.

You mean China is not developing biological weaponds?

Re: We must pace the frontier

#266
post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right that it’s easier to do this via Tor than an LLM. Those are the safeguards…

So what's the fuss about then? Is the idea that a Chinese company will release a model that will have no safeguards? For what purpose? Basic safeguards are all that's required, and they've been there in every usable model since GPT-2, including Chinese models that are supposedly "unsafe". Or are we saying that some lunatics will start training their own models, spin up a GPU cluster, run some abliteration workflow, o…

Yes, that is exactly Dario's concern. Either one of the US labs or one of the Chinese ones will eventually release something with insufficient safety controls for its power level because it gives them slightly better user retention (look how much complaining there is about current frontier models, especially Fable, rejecting requests). Regulation or consortium is how you avoid the prisoner's dilemma.

Re: We must pace the frontier

#269
post #118

I don't see how the dual goals of "we have to make an agreement with China for mutual slowdown" but also "we have to ensure we will always stay ahead of China" would work. I imagine the first thing the chinese government would demand in negotiations about such an agreement would be a lifting of the chip and distillation ban. > Some may believe these measures make it more difficult to cooperate with China, but I belie…

Probably thinks he has a better chance negotiating with China now than with misaligned AGI in the future.

Re: We must pace the frontier

#270
Before Anthropic, I worked at Cruise for four years as it competed against Waymo. The culture rewarded (and demanded) moving quickly, trusting that the company could empirically discover the risks that the robot cars posed and iteratively solve them to keep up with the rate at which it was scaling out its technology. There was very little interest or appetite for coordinating or collaborating with other AV companies across the industry to create an externally vetted record of safety metrics, or to compare the safety of different brands, or learn from the advancements of other companies. Instead the focus went on racing to improve the capabilities and deploy quickly - a popular internal meme was the Michael Phelps vs le Clos photo showing overlaid with the Waymo/Cruise logos. It was when the two companies were neck-and-neck that I felt the most pressure to find ways to ship despite the risk, when time for deep analysis became more limited and communication lines to leadership became most stretched. It was disappointing to see one of these blind spots result in the Cruise incident and the loss of trust that ultimately sank our company’s efforts.

In that instance I was grateful the downside was limited to a single injury. It’s clear that future AI technology will have more monumental potential impacts. I really don’t want to be in a situation where leading labs, or competing nations, create the same race dynamic that prevents us from taking the appropriate level of caution. AI minds are a significantly more complex thing to understand than the software stack of an autonomous vehicle, and yet we are leaving ourselves less time to get this right.

I joined Anthropic at the end of 2022 and I share the concerns that many of my colleagues have recently chosen to state publicly about the potential for future technology to pose existential risk to all of humanity. If we don’t find a way collectively as an industry to pace ourselves, then within two years the concerns we will be dealing with on a day-to-day basis will pose much larger downside risk than anything else we’ve seen from technology to date. I’m grateful that Dario has put his perspective out publicly and hope that this inspires other voluntary action and tops down coordination.

It’s a beautiful Saturday morning with my family here in the East Bay. While I hope we have many more years, I don’t know how many more Saturdays I’ll be able to play outside with my kids in the sunshine so I’m going to make the most of the time we have.

Post reply on HN