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

Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 64 posts

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#21

Post by Pannoniae »

kenjackson wrote: post #17
Pannoniae wrote: post #13

Moving AI governance "forward" - means working on eliminating the competition via regulatory capture, censoring and blackholing any facts they don't like, and preserving the economical status quo with enriching themselves. None of this will protect against actual risks like massive job losses without any reskilling, lowering of living standards and widespread censorship.

This is short-sighted. Governance will happen with or without the assistance from OpenAI. Google is still much larger than OpenAI and presumably has much more regulatory presence than OpenAI. The same goes from Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, and others in the space. I think OpenAI is making it clear to get your seat at the table now. And it probably will be true that this will make it harder for upstarts to join in, but ev…

I don't see why this would be short-sighted. OpenAI censors way more than required by the laws of any western country..... It's not just censoring extremism, hate, threats and national security issues, it's applying a corporate bland sanitization to everything. It refuses to write an opinion about anything even slightly controversial, it blackholes the existence of entire books and it refuses to roleplay even slightly morally dubious characters, all in the name of "safety".

And also, in our globalised world, if one or two countries decide to kill competition in the AI space, then I'll bet you that the hosting will move to a different country:)

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#22

Post by logicchains »

I hope at least some republican lawmakers aren't too senile to recognise the threat this poses. AI will play a huge role in our futures, and if OpenAI, Google et al. get their way, it'll essentially be illegal to have an AI capable of expressing conservative political views.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#23

Post by flangola7 »

Pannoniae wrote: post #13

Moving AI governance "forward" - means working on eliminating the competition via regulatory capture, censoring and blackholing any facts they don't like, and preserving the economical status quo with enriching themselves. None of this will protect against actual risks like massive job losses without any reskilling, lowering of living standards and widespread censorship.

Worrying about censorship and job losses is so myopic my eyes are cringing just thinking about it.

This is akin to a ship sinking while people are blocking the hallways and fretting about how their makeup looks and where they put their jewelry at. It's so maddeningly absurd there's no point in even discussion, shove them in the nearest cabin and out of the way so the serious people can get on with it.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#24

Post by Pannoniae »

flangola7 wrote: post #23
Pannoniae wrote: post #13

Moving AI governance "forward" - means working on eliminating the competition via regulatory capture, censoring and blackholing any facts they don't like, and preserving the economical status quo with enriching themselves. None of this will protect against actual risks like massive job losses without any reskilling, lowering of living standards and widespread censorship.

Worrying about censorship and job losses is so myopic my eyes are cringing just thinking about it. This is akin to a ship sinking while people are blocking the hallways and fretting about how their makeup looks and where they put their jewelry at. It's so maddeningly absurd there's no point in even discussion, shove them in the nearest cabin and out of the way so the serious people can get on with it.

Well, what do you think, what is the bigger issue then? I just mentioned the most immediate concerns, but of course, there are lots of other ones.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#25

Post by kenjackson »

Pannoniae wrote: post #21
kenjackson wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is short-sighted. Governance will happen with or without the assistance from OpenAI. Google is still much larger than OpenAI and presumably has much more regulatory presence than OpenAI. The same goes from Meta, Amazon, Microsoft, and others in the space. I think OpenAI is making it clear to get your seat at the table now. And it probably will be true that this will make it harder for upstarts to join in, but ev…

I don't see why this would be short-sighted. OpenAI censors way more than required by the laws of any western country..... It's not just censoring extremism, hate, threats and national security issues, it's applying a corporate bland sanitization to everything. It refuses to write an opinion about anything even slightly controversial, it blackholes the existence of entire books and it refuses to roleplay even slightl…

There's a difference between regulation and self-censoring. Major League Baseball bans a bunch of behavior that is legal from their players. Other baseball leagues could permit such behavior.

This is about both defining the regulations and practices. Other companies can have different practices. Fox News and MSNBC both report the news, but do so with very different principles and practices. But they are both beholden to the same laws (around libel, slander, etc...).

For AI these laws will be created, period. It will happen. And companies will also take on different perspectives about their own practices. As you note, there may well be laws about national security. But I imagine bland sanitization will be a feature of some versus others. The market will settle some of this, but you're short-sighted if you think the market will be the arbiter of it all.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#26

Post by JohnFen »

flangola7 wrote: post #23
Pannoniae wrote: post #13

Moving AI governance "forward" - means working on eliminating the competition via regulatory capture, censoring and blackholing any facts they don't like, and preserving the economical status quo with enriching themselves. None of this will protect against actual risks like massive job losses without any reskilling, lowering of living standards and widespread censorship.

Worrying about censorship and job losses is so myopic my eyes are cringing just thinking about it. This is akin to a ship sinking while people are blocking the hallways and fretting about how their makeup looks and where they put their jewelry at. It's so maddeningly absurd there's no point in even discussion, shove them in the nearest cabin and out of the way so the serious people can get on with it.

> Worrying about censorship and job losses is so myopic my eyes are cringing just thinking about it.

Why?

I'm not concerned about censorship, but I am deeply concerned about the potential economic fallout. Why shouldn't I be? I would genuinely love to have one less worry on my plate.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#27

Post by JohnFen »

flangola7 wrote: post #16
two_in_one wrote: post #6

What OpneAI is lobbying is actually a ban, better world wide, on products better then theirs. Just exactly the level they have, accidentally. It's not for profit or anything other all the humankind good, of course.

Altman has written about the dangers for years, from before OpenAI was even founded. The constant cope of claiming it's all just another corporate money making ploy is so tiresome and banal.

And yet, look what he's doing anyway. His concern about the dangers doesn't seem so deep in practice.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#29

Post by Pannoniae »

kenjackson wrote: post #25
Pannoniae wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why this would be short-sighted. OpenAI censors way more than required by the laws of any western country..... It's not just censoring extremism, hate, threats and national security issues, it's applying a corporate bland sanitization to everything. It refuses to write an opinion about anything even slightly controversial, it blackholes the existence of entire books and it refuses to roleplay even slightl…

There's a difference between regulation and self-censoring. Major League Baseball bans a bunch of behavior that is legal from their players. Other baseball leagues could permit such behavior. This is about both defining the regulations and practices. Other companies can have different practices. Fox News and MSNBC both report the news, but do so with very different principles and practices. But they are both beholden…

"But I imagine bland sanitization will be a feature of some versus others. The market will settle some of this, but you're short-sighted if you think the market will be the arbiter of it all."

Bland sanitization is bad for almost everyone. It will destroy society if not regulated... I certainly wouldn't want to live in a world where everything is converging towards rightthink and everything else gets memoryholed. AI is becoming similar to a public utility, so it should be regulated like it. That requires impartiality and a lack of censorship.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#30

Post by __loam »

GaggiX wrote: post #15

>current industry frontier >Dalle 2 I'm sorry OpenAI, but your model is not the frontier; also it's funny that it's the only text-to-image models mentioned, they probably know how better the other models are.

Yes there are so many better ways to produce ethically dubious, derivative trash.
Post reply on HN