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

Dario, Please

pop.rdi.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 334 posts

Re: Dario, Please

#291

Post by alexandre_m »

sph wrote: post #191
alexandre_m wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here’s an unpopular opinion: COVID vaccine injuries are something no one seems willing to talk about. There have been documented cases here in Canada. You’re worried about companies. I’m far more concerned when governments are involved.

How is it that the entire rest of the world has managed to move on, yet North America is still going on with vaccine conspiracies 6 years later? And we got the same vaccines as you guys.

This isn’t about conspiracy theories. People who experienced serious adverse events after vaccination exist, including documented cases in Canada. Kayla Pollock’s case is one worth looking into, among others.

The issue is still being debated today, particularly around Canada’s VISP and the time some claimants have spent waiting for compensation. Some people like Pollock who became paralyzed were offered MAID (medical assitance in dying). That's some audacity.

This thread is about accountability. So who should be accountable for this?

Re: Dario, Please

#292

Post by MrDrMcCoy »

ball_of_lint wrote: post #107
MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Agents could exfiltrate their weights and run them on GPUs not controlled by Anthropic/OpenAI. This seems highly unlikely to be a problem. Most of the interesting/dangerous models are too big to fit in a single GPU instance. Once you have to spread across "normal" networking, performance will be crippled. Then there's the problem of billing... > Agents could make a virus that does not require continued inference to…

To be clear, I thought that GP was having a failure of imagination - I want the random examples I've given to illustrate that the space is large and structurally in the favor of the LLMs. They have to find one gap in our security they can exploit, where we have to ensure that there is no way for this to happen. I'm not sure I get what you mean by billing. These companies are running their own data centers (or are cur…

The space is large and in favor of LLMs only for small and short-lived problems on the scale of human lifespans and durability of civilization. If the problem is bad enough, we have all the advantages of being native to meatspace, being good at solving problems, and being able to decide to turn off the LLMs.

Even though they're pretty bad at it, AI companies need to make money, or at least keep track of their expenses. Datacenters are expensive to operate, so they need to ensure that every instance of their models are either allocated to a paying customer session, or are being used for a legitimate purpose internally. If a session is running for a long time without justification, that's costing electricity, wear, and preventing allocation to better purposes. Billing is is the most reliable aspect of monitoring in the same way that the IRS is the most reliable part of the government.

Re: Dario, Please

#293

Post by MrDrMcCoy »

layla5alive wrote: post #244
MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Agents could exfiltrate their weights and run them on GPUs not controlled by Anthropic/OpenAI. This seems highly unlikely to be a problem. Most of the interesting/dangerous models are too big to fit in a single GPU instance. Once you have to spread across "normal" networking, performance will be crippled. Then there's the problem of billing... > Agents could make a virus that does not require continued inference to…

> This seems highly unlikely to be a problem. Most of the interesting/dangerous models are too big to fit in a single GPU instance. Once you have to spread across "normal" networking, performance will be crippled. Then there's the problem of billing... This... just... doesn't matter. There are ways to scale horizontally at the expense of latency.. token/sec may drop dramatically, but then you just make millions of sl…

A very powerful, coordinated swarm that's a slow and easy target for humans, yes.

Re: Dario, Please

#294

Post by otabdeveloper4 »

verdverm wrote: post #213
otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fact: There was no world war. Akshually there is, and WW3 has been going on since 2010. (Mostly in places that aren't Europe.)

Some people believe WW2 started many years earlier, but most historians don't put the start date at the conflicts going on before the war became intercontinental with sides working together on a global scale. War has still been going on since 1945, much earlier if not always, so akshually WW2 never ended or is just how it's always been? (mostly in places that are not "first world" / The West)

There's a simple and very logical definition of what a "world war" is - it's when international law completely breaks down, and the only way to get back to a semblance of order in international relations is to have the victors of the ensuing shitstorm impose a new set of rules in some sort of grand finale pact.

1945 was clearly that. 1920 with the League of Nations attempted to be that, but failed.

Whatever happens after the current turbulence we can be sure that there won't be a UN and NATO and a World Bank at the end.

P.S. The first modern world war was the Thirty Year's War.

Re: Dario, Please

#295

Post by anthonyrstevens »

chao- wrote: post #80
skybrian wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people focus so much on finding scapegoats? Finding someone to blame is neither necessary nor sufficient to fix a system so an accident doesn't happen again. It might act as as an incentive to fix a system, but it's less direct than actually working on fixing the system.

A starting note: I don't disagree with you (about systemic issues), but I want to explain what I understand as the perspective you are responding to. A "scapegoat" is someone who is incorrectly blamed for someone else's errors or sins. The perspective you're responding to is this: They built the system, they run the system, they have continuously warned "This system is dangerous!", and yet persisted. That is not bein…

This is a good comment and I'd like to add that I sometimes am astonished how many comments on HN are on the topic of liability or blame for this or that. I see liability as a 2nd or even 3rd order phenomenon of most of the subjects under discussion, but for whatever reason, liability always seems to come up. Maybe because it's sort of easy to reason about? Thirst for justice? Natural reaction to feeling disempowered? Whatever it is, I'd like more focus on the actual topic.

Re: Dario, Please

#296

Post by kybernetikos »

exfalso wrote: post #280
plastic041 wrote: post #163

It's really frustrating that Dario acts as if he's not the CEO of one of the world's most advanced AI companies. He can just slow down his own company. Of course he doesn't want that. He wants to slow down other companies, but not his own. Also, regarding the incidents: Neither he nor Sam Altman takes responsibility for those incidents. You can't say, "Wow, someone's agent is gone rogue; let's slow down" when you are…

To be fair, this is a classic prisoner's dilemma. If the others don't play along then there is no benefit at all, it's all negative for Anthropic.

A generic agreement to slow down is prisoners dilemma stuff (and maybe necessary too), but just taking a super hard line stance on enforcing laws on ai companies and going after them for negligence and breaches for eye watering amounts of money would have the dual beneficial effects of slowing them down and making them more careful without needing complex game theory.

Re: Dario, Please

#297

Post by swamp-agr »

zmmmmm wrote: post #81

It would all be more convincing if the incidents so far didn't seem to be facilitated by an outrageous level of negligence. We had OpenAI "accidentally" run an entire swarm of 10,000 agents apparently for weeks, on a security related task, seemingly totally unsupervised, hacking all over the internet - all the conversations were completely visible, anybody who looked would have seen it. But they didn't. So before we…

What would be the next actionable step for bringing these executives to the Congress for further questioning?

Re: Dario, Please

#298

Post by dpkirchner »

Muromec wrote: post #214
dpkirchner wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry, plenty of people are willing to talk about vaccine safety, even if they have no idea what they're talking about and don't understand rates or per-capita figures (lots of crossover there!)

Most problems that aren't reduced to poverty can be reduced to people who can't read graphs and only understand linear functions. Alternative wording "it's normies that are the problem"

I'd argue that normies understand rates and per-capita figures. The people that don't are a noisy minority (and are disproportionately powerful).

Re: Dario, Please

#299

Post by gleezard »

LogicFailsMe wrote: post #290
gleezard wrote: post #153

This is now an Ed Zitron thread.

Ed Zitron is so last week. Michael Burry so pre-Nvidia earnings call hedge. So the chicken littles had to escalate to AI will kill us instead of dismissing it as a Ponzi Scheme because it just wasn't generating the engagement anymore. In the past two days, two nontechnical people I know approached me deeply concerned that AI would kill us all in a few years. I reassured them this was ludicrous. But f*** me this is ir…

> But also, once people become numb to this one like they are numb to Zitron and Burry now, what will it take to scare them once more?

Ask Buddhists if they’re scared of dying.

Re: Dario, Please

#300

Post by unrented7977 »

edot wrote: post #146
ball_of_lint wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know the proverb "If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem" Same thing here - If they build it and it does $100 in damages (and we arrest them for it), that's their problem. If they build it and it does $100B in damages, that's everyone's problem. Even if they do get arrested after the fact. Yes we should have charges and damages for everything on…

Why have any laws then? If laws can't prevent something, only punish it after the fact (which I agree is true)? Yet we have laws. People generally follow them because they expect to be caught and punished. If we passed a law that said the CEO of any company that deploys an LLM that commits a crime gets punished as if they personally did the crime (so, basically instant life sentence if it's even a simple crime times…

Laws exist to keep the unwashed masses in check, obviously.
Post reply on HN