Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe because "apologies for linking to X" is needless gaudy virtue signalling. Make it "Apologies for linking to Amodei" and we're talking.
Just seems like virtue to me.
[deleted]
On AI regulation and messaging
151–160 of 572 posts
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The thing that will work is actually curing cancer. I think typical bubble behavior the leaders have set up the whole promise to fail. Everyone is expecting some faux super intelligence to come and find a cancer solution everyone else missed. However, it is just as likely that vanilla current LLM's will create enough of a productivity boost for back office automations in research heavy hospitals to create the space…
I mean they did solve the protein folding problem did they? NOt too far fetch to think it can automate cancer research or problem finding in some way.
The protein folding solutions like ESM/Alphafold were not due to this LLM/agentic coding or autoresearch type approaches though. They were designed by bio ML researchers.
It's hard to keep track of the frontier on bio ML, but it seems that we're going slower than what Demis Hassabis said in 2024 with 5 years to full cell molecular simulation. We still aren't able to reliably model a tiny surface of the cell membrane.
And of course there's Derek Lowe's takes on the drug discovery pipeline waiting for the proof in the pudding.
To me the only reasonable bullish position is that there is a very non-linear AGI threshold for accelerating progress that we haven't hit yet.
For me personally, I'm looking at other more tractable fields as a proxy to measure this kind of progress. The best modest evidence is from the agentic coding area, (modest because these kinds of gains may not translate to bio progress). Other soft-ish fields to like legal/law/tax are also interesting to watch, as a small amount of people are now trusting AI for these areas that were considered totally unusable a year ago. Another proxy is being able to generate generally entertaining media.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
While there is a large element of paranoia here, we're already seeing serious problems in e.g. planning consultations that people can just spam them with AI. AI makes a lot of traditional social processes stop working properly. > puts in it's regulations that you're not allowed to use AI to communicate with them (we all know this is coming), .. do we? > You get a mail from the government about taxes. You want to chec…
>AI makes a lot of traditional social processes stop working properly.
Which is mostly a good thing because most of those processes were cooked up to be exclusionary but with plausible deniability
God forbid some upstart get a big contract they "shouldn't" have gotten because AI lets them create a submission that's on par with a big guys.
God forbid Joe Schmo be able to prepare the paperwork and dot his I's and cross his T's and be able to take advantage of some stupid zoning exemption that you spec'd out to essentially be only available to big moneyed interests.
The ability to suffer one's way through beurocratic process without having to suffer through paying the lawyers and accountants and engineers and whatnot to get you through that process is a huge part of the value proposition of AI. But people don't frame it like for obvious reasons.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
And maybe don't allow the military to use your AI WHEN YOU CAN'T TELL WHETHER IT WAS INVOLVED IN THE KILLING OF HUNDREDS OF SCHOOL CHILDREN
[flagged]
There is a huge difference between your product being used for basic military operations like taking notes or getting from A to B, and your products suggesting military operations that kill hundreds of schoolchildren, an obvious and horrific war crime.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#155I genuinely think Dario is a well intentioned, intelligent dude, but I think him and Anthropic have a huge PR problem and are really out of touch with how they're perceived. Anthropic in particular has developed this almost Orwellian like veil of condescending rhetoric that on the surface suggests they're looking out for you while underneath they're taking actions that suggest they do not trust you, Mr/Mrs Ordinary P…
Out of all the families of models anthropic by far has the highest chance of extinction level misalignment during a hypothetical hard take-off because it's trained to act like it knows better than the humans trying to use it.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#156I see little conversation about AI powering robots' core and the fact that we are going to have like a billion robots by the end of this decade. Yes, sorry if trust is low.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The thing that will work is actually curing cancer. This is honestly hilarious. Dario must think people are stupid. First, cancer research charities are some of the most well funded on this planet. They all obtain donations on the basis of "together, we will cure cancer" messaging. They all fund the best science they can. Second, the human body is a complicated thing. You can feed your fancy LLM as many textbooks a…
Besides cancer isn't really "a disease" but rather "a family of diseases" that can vary a lot. Even breast cancer can be one of many different cancers. It's like saying "we'll cure infectious diseases"
> It's like saying "we'll cure infectious diseases"
Don't worry, I'm sure that's his next blog post. Right after Claude has finished solving famine and poverty. ;)
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
And maybe don't allow the military to use your AI WHEN YOU CAN'T TELL WHETHER IT WAS INVOLVED IN THE KILLING OF HUNDREDS OF SCHOOL CHILDREN
[flagged]
Thou shalt not kill, that's all there is to it really
If you provide tools that help an organization kill easier, and possibly lazily rely on your inaccurate tools' judgment, and you do not care about the outcomes of these tools' uses, that's on your soul, too.
Yes, causality and attribution are hard sometimes, but it may have been that without it, hundreds of humans would be alive right now, and he doesn't even know. Maybe he should talk to the kids' parents about what alignment means.
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
Swap that to "oil" and everyone goes "well, yes, obviously, oil is so powerful that people start wars over it". Iran has hit the Amazon data center in Bahrain. The Ukranian deep drone bombing campaign has hit refineries, but also Wildberries, the "Russian Amazon" warehouses. The US campaign against Iran now, Iraq and Serbia previously, targeted power infrastructure. It will obviously be a target in the next war, and…
>Every time the US completes an AI data center, someone in the Chinese nuclear command updates their target priority list You might have stumbled on the way to convince people that more data centers are a good thing
Especially with many of those datacenters being built next to residential areas ...
Re: On AI regulation and messaging
#160> I think it is fundamentally a crisis of trust. I think that ordinary people don’t trust companies, governments, or the tech industry and always suspect that we are cooking up some new way to screw them over. [...] > I don’t think that a glitzy marketing campaign with a positive spin (which some have advocated that Anthropic do) is the way to win back that trust — at this point, saying that AI will cure cancer is mo…
Honestly, it kind of reminds me of my life. I need to start going to the gym, stop being a slob, start showing up to my job not like I'm a college freshman attending classes but as a respectable young man.
But instead of doing that, I'm going to drop everything and become a linux kernel maintainer. Learning about the internals of how RCU concurrency is implemented across subsystems is surely what I need to do right now!
(/j before I get crucified)