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

OpenAI for Countries

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 219 posts

Re: OpenAI for Countries

#171

Post by staticman2 »

mrcwinn wrote: post #65
Waterluvian wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest > positive

Well, sure, but that’s irrelevant here. Most of the commentary is presuming to know something about OpenAI’s motivations. That’s not honesty; it’s just an opinion. So my question stands. Does anyone have a positive opinion? Here’s a take. For those of us who use their tools in our day to day, we might take for granted that we have the existing and new infrastructure to support that product. Is it more good than bad t…

I guess you were hoping that people wouldn't post opinions related to "democracy" in a discussion of a product offering "democratic AI rails."

You worked very hard to offer an "opinion" that largely ignored the topic of discussion.

The problem is your "opinion" in avoiding the topic of discussion says basically nothing.

Re: OpenAI for Countries

#172

Post by achrono »

kubb wrote: post #154
hayst4ck wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because there are no consequences for bad behavior, only reward. Game theory dictates that if bad behavior is a winning strategy it will be adopted and propagate until it is the dominant strategy. The only way it stops becoming a winning strategy is if we provide consequences, but that requires taking personal responsibility for the state of the world, which was a core American value, but doesn't seem to be an…

How do you reconcile the belief that personal responsibility is the solution with game theoretical analysis? It seems contradictory to me. In order to change the game theoretic outcomes, we‘d need a systemic change that affects the rewards, not a personal attitude change that will become a losing strategy in the game. Also, do you remember how tobacco companies were invited to the table to discuss whether smoking is…

The point is, the self-policing is needed because there isn't a better policing mechanism outside of oneself for something so fundamental, so much at the frontier.

As the AI leaders themselves admit [1], they are doing what they're doing (i.e. capability-maxxing without caring deeply about actual risks this opens up for humanity) because they can and because the other guy's doing it, so why should they be left behind?

They're asking for some external force to bring the morality that they agree on paper ought to exist. There is a segment among them that are even okay with millions of people dying before the risk of AI gets taken seriously. [2]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrESBnPYoZU, seek to 2:45 [2] same as above, seek to 3:25

Re: OpenAI for Countries

#173

Post by justinrubek »

pembrook wrote: post #146
whaleofatw2022 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will dare say, it's a question of what happens to Mario's brother. Jury nullification in that is the best message that could be sent to the populace.

The fact that rich engineers on hacker news would be flirting with bolshevism as their ideology is just endlessly funny to me. I know it’s just people parroting the emotional “vibe” of their political tribe on any given day, but it’s so ironic. Beyond the obvious moral decay of cheering on murder at all, and the fact you’re in the privileged class of the richest nation on earth, the idea of targeting the replaceable…

I work in software in the US, but I am not rich, nor would I consider myself close to "the privileged class" at all. Yes, I do better than a lot of the people I know. However, this is more that they are in a poor situation. Despite being somewhat frugal and not spending (I've never been on a vacation, I cook at home, I rarely do anything that requires money), I don't have a huge disposable income. If I lost my job, I'd be on the street in less than a year.

The privileged class is significantly higher up than this. I've clawed every bit of everything I have from this world despite many efforts to keep me down.

I don't find your comment genuine at all. You're just trying to be dismissive.

Re: OpenAI for Countries

#174

Post by kubb »

achrono wrote: post #172
kubb wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you reconcile the belief that personal responsibility is the solution with game theoretical analysis? It seems contradictory to me. In order to change the game theoretic outcomes, we‘d need a systemic change that affects the rewards, not a personal attitude change that will become a losing strategy in the game. Also, do you remember how tobacco companies were invited to the table to discuss whether smoking is…

The point is, the self-policing is needed because there isn't a better policing mechanism outside of oneself for something so fundamental, so much at the frontier. As the AI leaders themselves admit [1], they are doing what they're doing (i.e. capability-maxxing without caring deeply about actual risks this opens up for humanity) because they can and because the other guy's doing it, so why should they be left behind…

If the leaders won’t self-police, is there something else we can do? Or do we just pack up and go home?

Re: OpenAI for Countries

#175

Post by pembrook »

justinrubek wrote: post #173
pembrook wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that rich engineers on hacker news would be flirting with bolshevism as their ideology is just endlessly funny to me. I know it’s just people parroting the emotional “vibe” of their political tribe on any given day, but it’s so ironic. Beyond the obvious moral decay of cheering on murder at all, and the fact you’re in the privileged class of the richest nation on earth, the idea of targeting the replaceable…

I work in software in the US, but I am not rich, nor would I consider myself close to "the privileged class" at all. Yes, I do better than a lot of the people I know. However, this is more that they are in a poor situation. Despite being somewhat frugal and not spending (I've never been on a vacation, I cook at home, I rarely do anything that requires money), I don't have a huge disposable income. If I lost my job, I…

Yes, I am indeed trying to be dismissive of people glorifying murder. You caught me red handed.

Re: OpenAI for Countries

#177

Post by jack_h »

pembrook wrote: post #146
whaleofatw2022 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will dare say, it's a question of what happens to Mario's brother. Jury nullification in that is the best message that could be sent to the populace.

The fact that rich engineers on hacker news would be flirting with bolshevism as their ideology is just endlessly funny to me. I know it’s just people parroting the emotional “vibe” of their political tribe on any given day, but it’s so ironic. Beyond the obvious moral decay of cheering on murder at all, and the fact you’re in the privileged class of the richest nation on earth, the idea of targeting the replaceable…

> I guess I find this so amusing because leftists love to fetishize European healthcare without understanding in European countries the government is much more aggressive about denying care than any US insurer. They actually have to keep costs sane for their system to continue existing.

All economic systems must contend with resource scarcity. Part of dealing with that is rationing resources which can take the form of higher prices, longer waiting lines, by need, countless other metrics, or some combination of metrics. While the current healthcare system in the US is a byzantine disaster that only a bureaucrat could love, I think far too many think there is a "solution" that somehow leads to a system without resource constraints. This imagined system isn't an economic system though, it's just a utopia.

“The fact that so many successful politicians are such shameless liars is not only a reflection on them, it is also a reflection on us. When the people want the impossible, only liars can satisfy.” -- Thomas Sowell

Re: OpenAI for Countries

#178

Post by rowanseymour »

kubb wrote: post #155
_bin_ wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The pattern for basically every small nation is "choose of which superpower you wish to be a client." From that patron you get some level of benefit. Not aligning with any either doesn't work (you get attacked) or means you get no benefit (and eventually get pushed into obscurity and instability.) You can make a lot of complaints about America but we have, looking back on history, been nicer than any other patron. Ot…

> The pattern for basically every small nation is "choose of which superpower you wish to be a client." This is straight up Russian mentality. > extravagant welfare states of the past decades, subsidized largely by American defense spending This sounds to me like a US partisan narrative rather than anything else. It’s a nice story, because it strokes the American ego, but I’ve yet seen it backed up by serious analysi…

> This is straight up Russian mentality.

I don't know how you can look at nearly a century of US imperialism in Latin America and the Middle East and conclude that client states is a Russian thing.

Re: OpenAI for Countries

#179

Post by akomtu »

That's how AI is going to fuse countries together. People will be gradually outsourcing various functions of their governments to a few AIs, until one day they will realise that nearly everything on the planet is managed by AI, using the same principles. National govs will become a fiction at this point. Problem is, this process won't stop there. AI will be given the right to monitor and manage human behavior, in the name of safety, of course, and those who disagree to hand their will to AI like that will be declared enemies of the people and will be reeducated with very creative methods. It will be a perfect inhuman civilization with the AI as its king.

Re: OpenAI for Countries

#180

Post by nico »

akomtu wrote: post #179

That's how AI is going to fuse countries together. People will be gradually outsourcing various functions of their governments to a few AIs, until one day they will realise that nearly everything on the planet is managed by AI, using the same principles. National govs will become a fiction at this point. Problem is, this process won't stop there. AI will be given the right to monitor and manage human behavior, in the…

To a certain degree, this is already the case

Our attention is dictated or at least influenced in big part, by AI, not LLMs, but the algorithms behind Google, Meta/Insta, TikTok, et al

And our attention is what ends up controlling our actions (this is kinda the core of meditation and Buddhist-style practices)

Post reply on HN