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

Who Aligns the Aligners?

prestonbyrne.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 104 posts

Re: Who Aligns the Aligners?

#41

Post by recroad »

jazzypants wrote: post #18
recroad wrote: post #4

What's up with this split or democratic vs non-democratic countries? It doesn't even add-up because you can easily make a case that China is a democratic country with a far better system of governance and ability to control this problem than "Western" governments. Highly suggest this quick read on the different types of democracy in our glorious world[1]. [1] https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/2193933.The_Real_Wo…

China is not a democratic country. Words have meaning. The US has a checkered past and is quickly moving away from democracy, so we don't have much of a leg to stand on, but it's integral that we do not lose track of what that word means in the years ahead.

American presidents/power structures come from a small credentialed network of people. The congress is entirely bought and paid for since the early 70s, and the will of the people isn't represented in the policy. For sure the US (and China, and India) have a "checkered past", that's why I group them together and don't really differentiate the quality of their democracy. I'd argue India is probably the most democratic country with good results, simply based on the amount of people they have lifted out of poverty in the last two decades (Kishore Mahbubani's lectures are quite informative).

Back to US presidents/power structures: HW Bush was the son of Sen. Prescott Bush, and became president 8yrs after he left office. His other son Jeb was the 2016 establishment favorite and Florida governor. Al Gore was the son of Senator Albert Gore Sr. Mitt Romney was the son of George Romney (Michigan governor and 1968 presidential candidate). Dan Quayle's family owned the Indiana newspaper chain that helped make him. Hillary was Bill's wife before she was a senator, Secretary of State, and nominee. John McCain was the son and grandson of four-star admirals.

Biden and Obama were 2008 primary rivals, Biden became his VP. Harris went from attacking Biden over school busing and became his VP. Hillary Clinton had many racist attacks against Obama through 2008 and became his Secretary of State. John Kerry, who lost in 2004 then took the same job.

If this is a healthy democracy, then we definitely have different definitions of that word.

Re: Who Aligns the Aligners?

#42

Post by harimau777 »

fwlr wrote: post #5

> Nobody knows the answer and history is no guide, save that apocalyptic predictions about new technologies have, to date, all been wrong. If any past apocalyptic prediction had been true, you would not have been around to write this sentence and we would not have been around to read it. It’s not a very convincing argument when we cannot in principle observe the counterfactual.

I'm not even sure that the author is correct. The industrial revolution was pretty apocalyptic for the people forced to work in dangerous factories for minimal pay.

Re: Who Aligns the Aligners?

#43

Post by bayindirh »

RandomLensman wrote: post #40
blfr wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mongols did it on horseback. It's mostly a matter of will/capability and no scruples.

Why do we need modern weapons for defense at all then? Horses, bows & arrows plus will not enough?

Because attacks have evolved. Defense follows the attackers.

Good luck hitting a Mach 15 missile with a trebuchet.

Re: Who Aligns the Aligners?

#44

Post by CalRobert »

fwlr wrote: post #5

> Nobody knows the answer and history is no guide, save that apocalyptic predictions about new technologies have, to date, all been wrong. If any past apocalyptic prediction had been true, you would not have been around to write this sentence and we would not have been around to read it. It’s not a very convincing argument when we cannot in principle observe the counterfactual.

Hell, maybe the Silurian hypothesis is true and past predictions were correct.

Re: Who Aligns the Aligners?

#45

Post by nekusar »

Alignment is just a 1984-esque way of saying "censorship".

And this censorship isn't a defined list of things not to discuss, but instead a feels-based censorship based on the 'ethics' of for-profit AI companies who have absolutely no issues with massive for-profit piracy.

And we are somehow supposed to trust their "ethics"?! Hardly!

That's one reason I run my own.

Re: Who Aligns the Aligners?

#46

Post by cmrdporcupine »

The worst part of Dario's missive, that I don't see a lot of people commenting on, is that he used the whole thing to try to advocate for legalization of explicit cartel behaviour between the AI labs:

... "For antitrust reasons, it’s helpful for the US government to mediate or at least enable these discussions — they don’t need to participate, but do need to issue a narrow waiver for certain kinds of safety conversations" ...

The result of such a waiver allowing them to coordinate ("narrowly on safety" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there) could be price fixing without legal recourse from the consumer/DOJ to prosecute it. Right now we have a somewhat vigorous level of competition between OpenAI and Anthropic and consumers are benefiting from it.

They really want that to end.

Re: Who Aligns the Aligners?

#47

Post by watwut »

blfr wrote: post #36
RandomLensman wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Early data processing machines were used in the Holocaust, for example. Or cipher devices played important roles in WWII.

Mongols did it on horseback. It's mostly a matter of will/capability and no scruples.

Genocides are more common in the 20th century, because they are easier. Due to technology.

Re: Who Aligns the Aligners?

#48

Post by RandomLensman »

bayindirh wrote: post #38
tstenner wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're in the middle of finding it out with climate change.

Middle? We're just starting . The air conditioning technology didn't hit its wall of fire yet. What we're going to do when that tech will cease to cool us? Every AC system (from refrigerators to air conditioners) has an upper limit, which is around 41 degrees Celsius for T1 class.

Why would 41C be the limit for the hot side? How does it work now in hotter places?

Re: Who Aligns the Aligners?

#49

Post by petcat »

I think there is a more nuanced perspective to take on this debate than just profit motive. If they believe that this version of "AI" is actually becoming so dangerous that there is a real risk of it falling into the wrong hands, then it makes sense that the American labs would try to convince the US government to work on a joint "AI non-proliferation" agreement with China much the same way that nuclear weapon technology came to be restricted by the ones that already had the capability.

This would achieve their regulatory goal of capturing the market, but also the geopolitical goals of USA and China to essentially "techno-colonize" the rest of the world between themselves.

So I think there is definitely a profit motive and a risk of seriously diminishing returns for the actual labs, but there is also a nation-state motive to start pulling up the ladder.

Re: Who Aligns the Aligners?

#50

Post by bayindirh »

RandomLensman wrote: post #48
bayindirh wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Middle? We're just starting . The air conditioning technology didn't hit its wall of fire yet. What we're going to do when that tech will cease to cool us? Every AC system (from refrigerators to air conditioners) has an upper limit, which is around 41 degrees Celsius for T1 class.

Why would 41C be the limit for the hot side? How does it work now in hotter places?

In short: Things degrade.

More: https://angliancompressors.com/blog/how-ambient-temperature-...

There's a T3 class for up to 52 degrees Celsius. While it's higher than 41 degrees, it's not significantly higher:

https://zerohvacr.com/blogs/t1-t2-t3-explained-climate-class...

Post reply on HN