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

For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

erkansaka.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 179 posts

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#141

Post by pixl97 »

carodgers wrote: post #120
Gregkion wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't really matter if it will be an LLM or Lecuns world model. Lecuns world model, if its the right architecture, will be retrained by google, anthropic and co with the massive amount of compute they have and the massive amount of data. Also i'm pretty sure Lecun didn't get his money from thin air so big companies are invested in this one way or the other. And an LLM can easily, today, just rebuild a chess engi…

"And an LLM can easily, today, just rebuild a chess engine and beat whatever they need to beat." Always claims and promises about what they "can" do. This pattern is constant across AI hype. No one can prove that an LLM will forever fail to solve problem X, so the claim goes uncontested, and humans are biased to believe unrebutted claims. I reject this fallacious line of reasoning. I will instead require evidence of…

Then why do you care so much to repeatedly post in this thread?

If they are no danger and will never do anything, just let them get banned, or don't. If you are correct (which you are not) then they won't affect your world in any way.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#142

Post by pixl97 »

applfanboysbgon wrote: post #14
mercurywells wrote: post #13

How does that compare/contrast to the nuclear physicists speaking out during the early part of the 20th century?

The nuclear physicists were not banking on getting a trillion dollars invested in them by speaking out, for one. "Nuclear weapons are probably going to kill us all. For that reason, we need you to give us as much money as possible so we can work on deploying them in widespread global commercial usage." doesn't sound quite as convincing, does it?

Um, guess you never heard of the Manhattan project.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#143

Post by ACCount39 »

carodgers wrote: post #125
ACCount39 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If chess ELO is the best proxy for general intelligence, then surely, even Deep Blue was smarter than any human alive? You can also claim that the best proxy for general intelligence is being able to multiply large numbers. In which case both humans and LLMs lose resoundingly to an old Casio. Pick a piss poor metric - get a piss poor result. Also, LeCun is a fool and his "world model" approach has consistently failed…

Chess ELO is not a proxy for general intelligence because many intelligent people choose to learn things other than chess. But any intelligent person can, if they choose, learn chess and play it well. LLMs cannot do this. They still play very poorly relative to human pros, and even modern LLMs still understand the rules so poorly that they request illegal moves. Anyone claiming that we should be afraid of a text gene…

You picked a piss poor metric and you are getting piss poor results.

You can absolutely train an LLM-based model to be superhuman at chess. We just don't care enough to do so.

LLMs being even as good at implicitly tracking chess board states as they currently are is an emergent capability. The difficulty wasn't in "understanding rules of chess" in a long while now.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#144

Post by pixl97 »

ahf8Aithaex7Nai wrote: post #127
Gregkion wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2. Astra just came out and Fable 5/5.1 too. These are SIGNIFICANT better in plenty of tasks than Opus in November. Try it out. Ask Opus 4.8 to do anything in 3d. Do the same with Fable or Astra. Just because you list up some type of random technology, doesn't make it an good argument. Metaverse, Hyperloop and the crypto stuff was clearly garbage from the beginning. Easy to dismiss because all of it had massive faults…

> Just because you list up some type of random technology, doesn't make it an good argument. In what way is this random? It's a chronology of the bullshit from the past few years. Also: easy to say in hindsight. The hype was there, and many people believed it. The press, in particular, just lapped up the claims the way a Labrador Retriever gobbles up whatever you put in front of it. > We have opened up a potential pa…

Hey, I remember when the Internet was just a bunch of bullshit that was going to go away too.

>It has no consciousness.

Why does it need it?

>It has no intentions.

All it needs is a prompt. Instrumental convergence (and humans hooking them up to everything else) takes care of the rest.

Really you sounds horrifically ignorant of how any evolutionary AI algorithms work and the problems we see come out of them in much simpler models.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#145

Post by sublinear »

pixl97 wrote: post #128
jackb4040 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://archive.ph/BzBjZ Read the article. The things the Chinese officials are worried about are: * Fake videos / disinformation * Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure * Data leaks * Advances in military sensing / targeting technology These concerns have little in common with the Yudkowskian / apocalyptic doom marketing the US hyperscalers are pushing now. The Times even says this explicitly in the second paragra…

The thing is all the above are threats. The internet being filled with more trash than ever is a threat to our sanity. The anti-social posts mass generated by AI is a threat to our societies. Bullshit news stories is a threat to our political processes and democracy. Smart cameras every are a threat to our privacy and freedom. AI enabled scams are a threat to our wallets. AI hacking is a threat to anything connected…

I think it's interesting that the top of your list is "internet (social media) being filled with trash".

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#146

Post by cmrdporcupine »

pixl97 wrote: post #138
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That posts seemingly tries to refute the idea of Dario etc's proclamations really being about regulatory capture by saying: "No, really, the engineers are just terrified!" But both things can be true at once: 1. Engineers inside these labs might genuinely be anxious or paranoid about what they are building. 2. ... at the corporate level, calling for heavy regulation, safety pauses, removal/suspension of anti-collusio…

> They are executing loss functions and reward systems and are responding to prompts. And because we trained them on the entirety of human knowledge this happens to look like self-preservation, fear of death, and instrumental goals. I mean, we train them in an evolutionary manner. Instrumental convergence will never happen, right?

I mean, yes, they cosplay as us-like things. That's a neat trick.

I'm not convinced that means what these fear-pilled engineers think it means tho?

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#148

Post by LogicFailsMe »

pixl97 wrote: post #135
LogicFailsMe wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, some sorts do assert humanity will be wiped off the planet by AI. I don't share that view either. I think it's ludicrous. We've lived through much worse without any sort of technology beyond fire and a big stick. But the end of scarcity and disease is a fantastic thing if it happens. If our lizard brains do not bridge that transition and instead attempt to maintain the billionaire status quo, I agree, we're…

>We've lived through much worse without any sort of technology beyond fire and a big stick. No 'we' didn't. A whole shitload of much smaller isolated communities did. The world added 7+ billion more people since then. Imagine chlorine doesn't show up tomorrow? How many people die in two weeks? How far do you travel when no gas comes out of the pumps. How much will you stand out at night if you're the only ones with p…

The unprepared bonobos in the west will absolutely go through some things. But we have a national guard and once people aren't commuting to work daily, we have plenty of fuel in reserve (or we will again if we ever conclude the stupid war with Iran). People are a lot nicer to each other in my experience once the lights go out and social and corporate media stop ragebaiting them to hate each other.

1B+ individuals worldwide currently live in squalor. They will barely notice. The real crime is that in the midst of the west's carbon footprint buffet, we won't bother to uplift their lifestyles with the most basic conveniences. And while I am no fan of the billionaires, they absolutely have public and private personas or their business ventures would implode. They absolutely have god complexes, but don't mistake that for genuine idiocy.

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#149

Post by applfanboysbgon »

pixl97 wrote: post #142
applfanboysbgon wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nuclear physicists were not banking on getting a trillion dollars invested in them by speaking out, for one. "Nuclear weapons are probably going to kill us all. For that reason, we need you to give us as much money as possible so we can work on deploying them in widespread global commercial usage." doesn't sound quite as convincing, does it?

Um, guess you never heard of the Manhattan project.

Perhaps you'd like to educate me? How many scientists from the Manhattan project were made into millionaires/billionaires owing to their ownership stake in it? When exactly did nuclear weapons go to market as a commercial product targeted at enterprises and consumers around the world?

Re: For AI leaders Doom is a form of hype

#150

Post by carodgers »

ACCount39 wrote: post #143
carodgers wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chess ELO is not a proxy for general intelligence because many intelligent people choose to learn things other than chess. But any intelligent person can, if they choose, learn chess and play it well. LLMs cannot do this. They still play very poorly relative to human pros, and even modern LLMs still understand the rules so poorly that they request illegal moves. Anyone claiming that we should be afraid of a text gene…

You picked a piss poor metric and you are getting piss poor results. You can absolutely train an LLM-based model to be superhuman at chess. We just don't care enough to do so. LLMs being even as good at implicitly tracking chess board states as they currently are is an emergent capability. The difficulty wasn't in "understanding rules of chess" in a long while now.

"You picked a piss poor metric and you are getting piss poor results."

Well, we agree that the results are piss poor, at least.

Post reply on HN