Earlier quoted context omitted.
What?
that figure
On what basis do you make that conclusion?
The first big AI disaster is yet to happen
111–120 of 154 posts
Re: The first big AI disaster is yet to happen
#112Big AI disasters have most definitely already happened. We are just terrible at identifing them unless there's something exploding (literally) in our face. As an example, the recent "Make America Healthy Again" report released by the White House and the Health Secretary (RFK) was found to be AI generated, and was full of dubious science and made-up citations. How many people are going to directly die because of this?…
Nah there should definitely be a distinction between "someone trusted ai output which caused a problem" vs "already dumb arbitrary decisions have been made, and they throw out some AI paperwork to justify it"
Re: The first big AI disaster is yet to happen
#113AI-directed bombings of persons are already known to have occurred on a large scale, in Gaza. https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/ One source stated that human personnel often served only as a “rubber stamp” for the machine’s decisions, adding that, normally, they would personally devote only about “20 seconds” to each target before authorizing a bombing — just to make sure the Lavender-marked target…
This is a rare combination of awful factors, but most of them are all too human. Humans can sift through sigint (Cell phone calls, text messages, network access, etc.) to identify and locate targets. This is labour intensive and prone to error, but it can be done. In the past, such efforts were reserved only for high ranking members of Hamas and, if civilians were killed in the process, the IDF accepted that because…
The IDF is using AI to whitewash ethics in the same way genai is using it to whitewash copyright.
Historically, things have gone badly for society when ills were mostly constrained by potential culpability and prosecution of humans... and then that restriction was suddenly removed by technological advancement.
And the cybersecurity industry / CISOs (aka fall people, giving someone responsibility without authority) are a poor pattern to use to effectively limit tail risk.
At minimum, something more like financial auditing / engineer sign-off should be put in place around productionalized AI, preferably via a third-party.
Re: The first big AI disaster is yet to happen
#114> Chatbot sites like character.ai and Chai AI have been linked to user suicides, for understandable reasons: if you allow users near-unlimited control over chatbots, over time you’ll eventually end up with some chatbots who get into an “encouraging the user to self-harm” state. If cooking hadn't been invented 2.5 million years ago and instead you tried to invent it today, I wonder how many thousands of articles would…
[deleted]
Re: The first big AI disaster is yet to happen
#115“grok, how do i land this plane?”
“Sorry, I’m having issues right now. Our systems are experiencing heavy load, please try again later.”
Re: The first big AI disaster is yet to happen
#116It's worth making a distinction between proximate and non-proximate (or direct and indirect).
The train crashing is a proximate disaster. The train helping to enable genocide in WW2 is non-proximate but still tied causally to the capabilities that trains open up. In both cases these are unintended consequences.
Most of the dead bodies associated with technologies are non-proximate/indirect. The big disaster of nuclear physics wasn't the proximate Chernobyl it was the non-proximate invention of nukes and their spread. Oil spills vs climate change would be another example.
The deep unknown of what a new tech opens up is what we should be worried about rather than knowable malfunctions. Once you draw the black ball you can't put it back.
Re: The first big AI disaster is yet to happen
#117Me, yesterday:
"If you think about it - we're one misplaced negative sign, hallucinated by an LLM away from a disaster. At least multiply by zero won't crash things /s"
Re: The first big AI disaster is yet to happen
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considering that governments are trying to remove gas stoves from peoples homes for safety reasons yes, you would probably have a hard time introducing them from scratch today.
I've only heard suggestions (but nothing concrete) of regulating new stoves, don't believe anyone's proposed removing existing stoves. Where are you hearing this?
Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story!
Re: The first big AI disaster is yet to happen
#119> Chatbot sites like character.ai and Chai AI have been linked to user suicides, for understandable reasons: if you allow users near-unlimited control over chatbots, over time you’ll eventually end up with some chatbots who get into an “encouraging the user to self-harm” state. If cooking hadn't been invented 2.5 million years ago and instead you tried to invent it today, I wonder how many thousands of articles would…
Fire is vitally useful ... Starting a wildfire likely kills your entire tribe. Now, perhaps there should be some rules around using fire?
Is this really your analogy?
Also, there are TONS of rules about fire AND entire departments for dealing with it safely when it gets out of control.
Can you just directly make your point? (Is it "ai should have no regulation"?)
Re: The first big AI disaster is yet to happen
#120> Chatbot sites like character.ai and Chai AI have been linked to user suicides, for understandable reasons: if you allow users near-unlimited control over chatbots, over time you’ll eventually end up with some chatbots who get into an “encouraging the user to self-harm” state. If cooking hadn't been invented 2.5 million years ago and instead you tried to invent it today, I wonder how many thousands of articles would…
A knife won't use 10x human persuasiveness to encourage you to kill yourself.
[dead]