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

Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 1001 posts

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#181

Post by wkat4242 »

sledgehammers wrote: post #72
kypro wrote: post #64

While I'd agree with sentiment in this threat that GPT-4 and current AI models are not dangerous yet, I guess what I don't understand is why so many people here believe we should allow private companies to continue to develop the technology until someone develops something dangerous? Those here who don't believe AI should be regulated, do you not believe AI can be dangerous? Is that you believe a dangerous AI is so f…

They are already dangerous in the way they cause global anxiety and fear in people, and also because the effects of their usage to the economy and real lives of the people are unpredictable. AI needs to be regulated and controlled, the alternative is chaos. Unfortunately the current demented fossile and greedy monopolist lead system is most likely incapable of creating a sane & fair environment for the development of…

People always have been afraid of change. There's some religious villages in the Netherlands where the train station is way outside town because they didn't want this "devil's invention" there :P and remember how much people bitched about mobile phones. Or earlier, manual laborers were angry about industrialisation. Now we're happy that we don't have to do that kind of crap anymore.

Very soon they'll be addicted to AI like every other major change.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#183

Post by wkat4242 »

gautamdivgi wrote: post #142

Remember the paper where they admitted to having no "moat". This is basically them trying to build a "moat" through regulation. Since big-co are probably the only ones that can do any sort of license testing right now. It's essentially trying to have an "FDA" for AI and crowd out competitors before they emerge.

Yes exactly. This is the feeling I get too. They already have critical mass and market penetration to deal with all the red tape they want. But it's easy to nip startups in the bud this way.

Also, this will guarantee the tech stays in the hands of rich corporations armed with lawyers. It would be much better for open source AI to exist so we're not dependent on those companies.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#184

Post by freedomben »

elil17 wrote: post #129

This is the message I shared with my senator (edited to remove information which could identify me). I hope others will send similar messages. Dear Senator [X], I am an engineer working for [major employer in the state]. I am extremely concerned about the message that Sam Altman is sharing with the Judiciary committee today. Altman wants to create regulatory roadblocks to developing AI. My company produces AI-enabled…

> Altman and his ilk

IANA senator, but if I were you lost me there. The personal insults make it seem petty and completely overshadow the otherwise professional-sounding message.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#186

Post by wewxjfq »

supriyo-biswas wrote: post #8
RhodesianHunter wrote: post #2

Regulatory capture and monopolies are now as American as apple pie.

There’s similar regulation being proposed in the EU. I wonder if OpenAI is behind it as well.

EU publishes the lobbying data. Seems like OpenAI, Microsoft, and Google all had at least two recent meetings with EU representatives on the AI Act.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#188

Post by pdonis »

chaxor wrote: post #120
srslack wrote: post #9

Imagine thinking that regression based function approximators are capable of anything other than fitting the data you give it. Then imagine willfully hyping up and scaring people who don't understand, and because it can predict words you take advantage of the human tendency to anthropomorphize, so it follows that it is something capable of generalized and adaptable intelligence. Shame on all of the people involved in…

What do you think about the papers showing mathematical proofs that GNNs (i.e. GATs/transformers) are dynamic programmers and therefore perform algorithmic reasoning? The fact that these systems can extrapolate well beyond their training data by learning algorithms is quite different than what has come before, and anyone stating that they "simply" predict next token is severely shortsighted. Things don't have to be '…

> What do you think about the papers showing mathematical proofs that GNNs (i.e. GATs/transformers) are dynamic programmers and therefore perform algorithmic reasoning?

Do you have a reference?

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#189

Post by zootreeves »

rdedev wrote: post #146
chaxor wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think about the papers showing mathematical proofs that GNNs (i.e. GATs/transformers) are dynamic programmers and therefore perform algorithmic reasoning? The fact that these systems can extrapolate well beyond their training data by learning algorithms is quite different than what has come before, and anyone stating that they "simply" predict next token is severely shortsighted. Things don't have to be '…

To be fair LLMs are predicting the next token. It's just that to get better and better predictions it needs to understand some level of reasoning and math. However it feels to me that a lot of this reasoning is brute forced from the training data. Like chatgpt gets some things wrong when adding two very large numbers. If it really knew the algorithm for adding two numbers it shouldn't be making them in the first plac…

You know the algorithm for arithmetic. Are you telling me you could sum any large numbers first attempt, without any working and in less than a second 100% of the time?

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#190

Post by unethical_ban »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #172

I don’t understand the need to control AI tech, no matter how advanced, in any way what-so-ever. It is a tool. If I use a tool for illegal purposes I have broken the law. I can be held accountable for having broken the law. If the laws are deficient, make the laws stronger and punish people for wrong deed, regardless of the tool at hand. This is a naked attempt to build a regulatory moat while capitalizing on fear of…

The below is not an endorsement of any particular regulation.

It is a tool which allows any individual to have nearly instant access not only to all the world's public data, but the ability to correlate and research that data to synthesize new information quickly.

Without guardrails, someone can have a completely amoral LLM that has the ability to write persuasive manifestos on any kind of extremist movement that prior would have taken someone with intelligence.

A person will be able to ask the model how best to commit various crimes with the lowest chances of being caught.

It will enable a level of pattern matching and surveillance yet unseen.

I know the genie is out of the bottle, but there are absolutely monumental shifts in technology happening that can and will be used for evil and mere dishonesty.

And those are just the ways LLM and "AI" will fuck with us without guardrails. Even in a walled garden, we honestly won't be able to trust any online interaction with people in the near future. Your comment and mine could both be LLM generated in the near future. Webs of trust will be more necessary.

Anyone who can't think of about five ways AI is going to radically shake society isn't thinking hard enough.

Post reply on HN