131–140 of 1001 posts
Interesting choice of name. It’s like safe-super-weapon.
Glad to see Ilya is back in a position to contribute to advancing AI. I wonder how they are going to manage to pay the kinds of compensation packages that truly gifted AI researchers can make now from other companies that are more commercially oriented. Perhaps they can find people who are ideologically driven and/or are already financially independent. It's also hard to see how they will be able to access enough com…
I assume that OpenAI and others will support this effort and the comp / training / etc and they will be very well positioned to offer comparable $$$ packages, leverage resources, etc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, what does it matter. We're many lifetimes away from anything. These people are trying to define concepts that don't apply to us or what we're currently capable of. AI safety / AGI anything is just a form of tech philosophy at this point and this is all academic grift just with mainstream attention and backing.
This goes massively against the consensus of experts in this field. The modal AI researcher believes that "high-level machine intelligence", roughly AGI, will be achieved by 2047, per the survey below. Given the rapid pace of development in this field, it's likely that timelines would be shorter if this were asked today. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2024/1/10/24032987/ai-imp...
Glad to see Ilya is back in a position to contribute to advancing AI. I wonder how they are going to manage to pay the kinds of compensation packages that truly gifted AI researchers can make now from other companies that are more commercially oriented. Perhaps they can find people who are ideologically driven and/or are already financially independent. It's also hard to see how they will be able to access enough com…
> compensation packages that truly gifted AI researchers can make now I guess it depends on your definition of "truly gifted" but, working in this space, I've found that there is very little correlation between comp and quality of AI research. There's absolutely some brilliant people working for big names and making serious money, there's also plenty of really talented people working for smaller startups doing incred…
the people i often have the most respect for.
I am not on the bleeding edge of this stuff. I wonder though: How could a safe super intelligence out compete an unrestricted one? Assuming another company exists (maybe OpenAI) that is tackling the same goal without spending the cycles on safety, what chance do they have to compete?
I don’t think that corporations left on their own will make safe AGI, and I am skeptical that we will have fair and technologically sound legislation - look at some of the anti cryptography and anti privacy laws raising their ugly heads in Europe as an example of government ineptitude and corruption. I have been paid to work in the field of AI since 1982, and all of my optimism is for AI systems that function in partnership with people and I expect continued rapid development of agents based on LLMs, RL, etc. I think that AGIs as seen in the Terminator movies are far into the future, perhaps 25 years?
Remember when OpenAI was focusing on building "open" AI? This is a cool mission statement but it doesn't mean anything right now. Everyone loves a minimalist HTML website and guarantees of safety but who knows what this is actually going to shake down to be.
> Our singular focus means no distraction by management overhead or product cycles, and our business model means safety, security, and progress are all insulated from short-term commercial pressures. Can someone explain how their singular focus means they won't have product cycles or management overhead?
Don't hire anyone who is a certified scrum master or has an MBA and you tend to be able to get a lot done.