Live data from Hacker News

SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

answer.ai

191–200 of 201 posts

Re: SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

#191
post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are they mismanaged other than having incompetent police?

As someone who lives in Seattle I can tell you at least two things 1) the homeless population and use of drugs out in the open on sidewalks in the city has gone up significantly and no plan for addressing. 2) the city management tends to be anti-tech, things like pushing Amazon and others out with the head tax and the gig worker min hourly pay and all that which basically shut down use of Uber eats and other delivery…

The open use of drugs is offensive but rarely dangerous. I live adjacent to Seatle and have been coming here for 30 years.

The gig worker min hourly pay is fine. If it decreases the total demand for deliveries thats ok. I wouldn't want more McJobs for the state to subsidize anyway. Those workers don't cease to exist they just work somewhere else for someone who can actually afford to pay.

Re: SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

#192
The entire notion of “safety” and “ethics” in AI is simply a Trojan horse for injecting government control and censorship over speech and expression. That’s what the governments get out of it. The big AI players like OpenAI, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, etc. are incentivized to go along with it because it helps them through regulatory capture and barriers to competition. They also make some friends with powerful legislators to avoid pesky things like antitrust scrutiny.

Legislation should not restrict the development or operation of fundamental AI technologies. Instead laws should only be built on the specific uses that are deemed illegal, irrespective of AI.

Re: SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

#193
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is going to become one the the site no-nos. What does this assertion add to the discussion? Is there any argument that serves as refutation?

Raising awareness so others too can flag TFA

The quality of the article is what should drive voting and flagging.

Your personal opinion as to what level of AI tooling was used in crafting the content is a low value signal and posting that speculation without meaningfully engaging in the content is as low value as commenting to say "this article sucks".

Personally, I think this would be a very strange place to find pute AI genetated content. This is a personal statement that was submitted to the state, and posted under a real name under a site the poster has a professional association with. I think that any "strangeness" in formating a wording comes from the role this text serves, as a public comment intended to affect policy.

Re: SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

#194
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> requires you to follow best practices (to be determined) Trigger happy regulation for a field that hasn't even come into full swing. It's indicative of an over-active immune system; lawmakers with nothing better to do. Pass laws against improper use and go after the malicious users. Don't ban the technology, the research, or even the applications. (Of which there will be abundant good uses. Many of which we've yet…

> Trigger happy regulation for a field that hasn't even come into full swing. It's indicative of an over-active immune system; lawmakers with nothing better to do. I guess they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. We constantly complain about slow lawmaking, "Look at how out of touch Congress are! XYZ technology is moving so fast, and they're always 10-20 years behind!" Finally, someone is actually on the…

> We constantly complain about slow lawmaking

I don't think I've ever complained about slow lawmaking.

I've complained about a lack of rights and a lack of enshrined rights.

Re: SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

#195
post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who lives in Seattle I can tell you at least two things 1) the homeless population and use of drugs out in the open on sidewalks in the city has gone up significantly and no plan for addressing. 2) the city management tends to be anti-tech, things like pushing Amazon and others out with the head tax and the gig worker min hourly pay and all that which basically shut down use of Uber eats and other delivery…

The open use of drugs is offensive but rarely dangerous. I live adjacent to Seatle and have been coming here for 30 years. The gig worker min hourly pay is fine. If it decreases the total demand for deliveries thats ok. I wouldn't want more McJobs for the state to subsidize anyway. Those workers don't cease to exist they just work somewhere else for someone who can actually afford to pay.

Eh, I don't want my kids around it, we shouldn't be ok with it, and I don't blame anyone who doesn't want to live near it. "Rarely dangerous" is a hell of a term if you've walked downtown at night as anyone but a large man (and as one even I am not a fan and moved my office to redmond from 4th ave area even though I live in north cap hill). I asked my visiting sister to avoid coming to my office in the evening when I was downtown after she was harassed by a few individuals who were very openly doing drugs, it's quite embarrassing for a supposedly well off city. We want the city to be safe and welcoming, not what it is today. We're looking as complacent as SF with no plans to cleanup and fix things.

The gig worker min rate has completely cut out their money, you can hear feedback directly from the gig workers and see that it's being reversed because of the backlash: https://www.newsweek.com/20-minimum-wage-law-seattle-deliver... -> "300,000 fewer orders within Seattle". I can't agree with you here at all. These are jobs people have the choice to take or not, the government here is eliminating that choice by basically making the jobs nonexistent. I know I've cut my orders significantly and will walk or drive myself nowadays to pick up food when I do get takeout.

"Those workers don't cease to exist they just work somewhere else for someone who can actually afford to pay" <- citation needed. Setting wage floors almost always get modeled out as shortages where supply of workers will no longer meet demand for jobs, and most people aren't perfectly fungible, nor are there are bunch of jobs that allow people to work for a few hours between other gigs, watching their kids, trying to be entrepreneurial, etc. Let adults decide which jobs they want to work for which pay. If there were alternative jobs that paid more don't you think they'd naturally flow there rather then the government stepping in?

Re: SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

#196
post #34

> The creator of a model can not ensure that a model is never used to do something harmful – any more so that the developer of a web browser, calculator, or word processor could. Placing liability on the creators of general purpose tools like these mean that, in practice, such tools can not be created at all, except by big businesses with well funded legal teams. This matches my thoughts on why this is ultimately a b…

1. The new Frontier Model Division is just receiving information and issuing guidelines. It’s not a licensing regime and isn’t investigating developers. 2. Folks aren’t automatically liable if their highly capable model is used to do bad things, even catastrophic things. The question is whether they took reasonable measures to prevent that. This bill could have used strict liability, where developers would be liable…

On point #3, as far as I can tell, the bill criteria defines a "covered model" (a model subject to regulation under this proposal) as any model that can "cause $500,000 of damage" or more if misused.

A regular MacBook can cause half a million dollars of damage if misused. Easily. So I think any model of significant size would qualify.

Furthermore, the requirement to register and pre-clear models will surely precede open data access, and that means a loss in competitive cover for startups working on new projects. I can easily see disclosure sites being monitored constantly for each new AI development, rendering startups unable to build against larger players in private.

Re: SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

#197
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The open use of drugs is offensive but rarely dangerous. I live adjacent to Seatle and have been coming here for 30 years. The gig worker min hourly pay is fine. If it decreases the total demand for deliveries thats ok. I wouldn't want more McJobs for the state to subsidize anyway. Those workers don't cease to exist they just work somewhere else for someone who can actually afford to pay.

Eh, I don't want my kids around it, we shouldn't be ok with it, and I don't blame anyone who doesn't want to live near it. "Rarely dangerous" is a hell of a term if you've walked downtown at night as anyone but a large man (and as one even I am not a fan and moved my office to redmond from 4th ave area even though I live in north cap hill). I asked my visiting sister to avoid coming to my office in the evening when I…

Delivery for random shit was never cheap before its not to ME shocking that it should reasonably be somewhat expensive to have someone drive their $50k car to the starbucks for you.

The government disallows work that people would otherwise do all the time for instance by instituting minimum wage, requiring benefits, or requiring regulation that drive up costs enough that marginal businesses fold. Those employees don't cease to exist they are reallocated to other parts of the market which are more worthy. In the end uber eats isn't worth anything it loses money. It's a side show until investors money runs out.

There are parts of Seattle that are shady. Unfortunately those people exist and they aren't going anywhere so we are basically playing whack a mole. If we want them out of people's faces we should probably house them. Finland did and it worked for them.

Re: SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

#198
post #34

> The creator of a model can not ensure that a model is never used to do something harmful – any more so that the developer of a web browser, calculator, or word processor could. Placing liability on the creators of general purpose tools like these mean that, in practice, such tools can not be created at all, except by big businesses with well funded legal teams. This matches my thoughts on why this is ultimately a b…

> any more so that the developer of a web browser, calculator, or word processor

Or even a piece of chipped flint or a pointy stick, if it comes to that.

Re: SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

#199
post #16

Which states would you speculate will be best long term for AI startups? I would’ve guessed California but it’s looking more important to pick a state less likely to get over their skis with regulation. Washington doesn’t seem yet to be doing this, and no state tax with lots of AI engineers/researchers in Seattle/redmond which is why I’m here. Texas probably won’t add regulations and has similar pros if you’re in Aus…

Tennessee -- It has a dam for power needs

Re: SB-1047 will stifle open-source AI and decrease safety

#200
post #16

Which states would you speculate will be best long term for AI startups? I would’ve guessed California but it’s looking more important to pick a state less likely to get over their skis with regulation. Washington doesn’t seem yet to be doing this, and no state tax with lots of AI engineers/researchers in Seattle/redmond which is why I’m here. Texas probably won’t add regulations and has similar pros if you’re in Aus…

Tennessee -- It has a dam for power needs

i don't see a bunch of tech people moving to tennessee, doesn't seem like a culture match
Post reply on HN