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

We must pace the frontier

darioamodei.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: We must pace the frontier

#941

Post by plaidfuji »

academia_hack wrote: post #90

Dario's proposed approach is a classic example of capital attempting to control technological advancement and the means of production. For the first time in human history, any member of the working class can just about afford to have a team of expert scientist/physician/lawyer/engineers working directly for them. Super intelligence (the ability to have many smarter minds than your own reporting to you) has always bee…

> For the first time in human history, any member of the working class can just about afford to have a team of expert scientist/physician/lawyer/engineers working directly for them. Super intelligence (the ability to have many smarter minds than your own reporting to you) has always been available to the wealthy and powerful.

This is an interesting framing, but when you put it this way, it makes it quite clear that intelligence without actionability is not so valuable. And capital is what creates action.

I can have the smartest doctor in my pocket, but if they can’t administer treatment, I’ll still die. I can have a world class scientist to talk to as long as I want, but they can’t build me a breakeven fusion reactor. A pocket lawyer… slightly more useful, but they still can’t take a case to court for me.

Talk and ideas are cheap. Always have been. Now they’re even cheaper. Implementation takes resources, and the more you have, the more useful intelligence is to you. Capital will be just fine.

Re: We must pace the frontier

#942

Post by 9dev »

bpodgursky wrote: post #575
cuuupid wrote: post #433

At what point do we stop engaging with Anthropic’s leadership in good faith and acknowledge their track record, - no open weights - can’t use claude to research AI - train on everyone else’s IP and sell it back to them - 8 regulatory capture attempts and counting - so controlling they are the only US company blacklisted by the US government This is not effective altruism / rationalism gone wild, it’s just monopolisti…

Do you have any familiarity with Anthropic at all? At no point did they ever say open weights are a good idea. Their entire thesis is AI IS VERY DANGEROUS AND WE MUST DO IT RIGHT. You can hate it, but everything they do is consistent with this thesis, and everything they say is consistent with their actions! You just want them to want different things.

Ah. Doing it right, then, means earning billions by giving the whole world access before we really understand how it works, and training models on cyber attacks using reinforcement learnings in flawed test settings?

I’m so full of all this corpo stan bullshit around these parts. Nothing about the AI labs is to humanity’s benefit.

Re: We must pace the frontier

#943

Post by swat535 »

deepwoods wrote: post #697
barrrrald wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have many issues with Anthropic, but I will say that their actions are fully consistent with a group of people who earnestly believe that AI is extremely dangerous In fact, I would say that the Occam’s razor explanation is not that they are seeking regulatory capture, but that they earnestly believe in the x-risk, and that they are the most thoughtful and capable people to address it You may disagree, you may think…

I agree with this take. Regardless of whether you think they're right, most everyone at Anthropic is acting in good faith. If this is an intentional media campaign it is a remarkably sloppy one. It has been effective because if you tell people they're going to die, they tend to pay attention - think of the grip the 2011 Harold Camping rapture prediction had on our collective psyche, or the 2012 apocalypse. But the me…

> Anthropic is acting in good faith

More like they've realized that the foreign models are quickly catching up and are able to sell their services cheaper to people thanks to China subsidizing their AI sector.

Elon, Dario and Sam are banding together to restrict AI to avoid competition and losing profit. They simply want the government to heavily regulate the technology so that they can reign it in with full control.

I bet you would be making the same comment if crypto was being developed by Anthropic. Dario would write a long essay, lecturing us on the dangers of it. He would argue that this technology can be used to by terrorists and should be heavily restricted.

Re: We must pace the frontier

#944

Post by twobitshifter »

barrrrald wrote: post #690
cuuupid wrote: post #433

At what point do we stop engaging with Anthropic’s leadership in good faith and acknowledge their track record, - no open weights - can’t use claude to research AI - train on everyone else’s IP and sell it back to them - 8 regulatory capture attempts and counting - so controlling they are the only US company blacklisted by the US government This is not effective altruism / rationalism gone wild, it’s just monopolisti…

I have many issues with Anthropic, but I will say that their actions are fully consistent with a group of people who earnestly believe that AI is extremely dangerous In fact, I would say that the Occam’s razor explanation is not that they are seeking regulatory capture, but that they earnestly believe in the x-risk, and that they are the most thoughtful and capable people to address it You may disagree, you may think…

There actions are fundamentally inconsistent with a group who believes AI is fundamentally dangerous - they are developing it and releasing it out into the world with the knowledge that it cannot be controlled by their current alignment techniques.

Re: We must pace the frontier

#947

Post by kentonv »

epihelix wrote: post #652
cuuupid wrote: post #433

At what point do we stop engaging with Anthropic’s leadership in good faith and acknowledge their track record, - no open weights - can’t use claude to research AI - train on everyone else’s IP and sell it back to them - 8 regulatory capture attempts and counting - so controlling they are the only US company blacklisted by the US government This is not effective altruism / rationalism gone wild, it’s just monopolisti…

> At what point do we stop engaging with Anthropic’s leadership in good faith About two years ago? I would also note that Dario's post appears to be LLM written. Maybe... maybe ... he's read so much Claudeish that it's all he can speak now himself. But I wonder if he's becoming a bit of a meat proxy. (It's funny, I thought "pace the frontier" was going to mean something similar to "patrolling the frontier". But no, i…

Dario has been writing long-winded essays like this since long before AI existed. I strongly doubt he's the type of person to delegate it to AI now.

"Pacing the frontier" sounds like something that was carefully wordsmithed in committee, to avoid terms like "slow-down" or "pause" that sound much more negative. They probably did ask an LLM to generate a list of options, because why wouldn't you? But the rest of the writing is almost certainly just Dario.

Re: We must pace the frontier

#949

Post by malfist »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #671
malfist wrote: post #659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I set my walet beside me and you swipe in walking by, you have still committed theft. Victim blaming isn't legally acceptable

Nah. I'm definitely going to blame the people who built a trivially exploitable system and got rich off it while everyone else has to deal with the consequences. By the way, you didn't commit theft. It's more like credit card fraud. User just disputes the charge and it kind of disappears. The banking system just absorbs it, because the optimal amount of fraud is non-zero. https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/optima…

> By the way, you didn't commit theft. It's more like credit card fraud.

I'm sure you carry cash and an ID or more in your wallet. Hardly just credit card fraud. The wallet itself has value too.

Re: We must pace the frontier

#950

Post by adsharma »

anon291 wrote: post #832
adsharma wrote: post #793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can have a transformer based index built on top of a graph database. Much of the explainability tech (people who prefer "alignment" also prefer "mechanistic interpretability") is reverse engineering the real world graph that's hiding in the weights. https://research.google/pubs/the-case-for-learned-index-stru...

That's literally not useful for the sort of applications people want to use transformers for.

What you're using is a transformer based database index. An obfuscated one.

Training data is the database. Model is a lossy compressed index.

Post reply on HN