21–30 of 40 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Won’t neutering a model by using only safe data for training create a safe model?
Can we call it general intelligence then? Is human intelligence not the sum of both good and bad people?
A nonprofit, just like OpenAI ... I don't get the "safe AI" crowd, it's all ghost and mirrors IMO. It's been almost a year to the date since Ilya got his first billion. Later, another two billion came in. Nothing to show. I'm honestly curious since I don't think Ilya is a scammer, but I can't imagine what kind of product they pretend to bring to the market.
Is there any indication you can actually build hard safety rules into models? It seems like all current guard rails are basically just prompting it extra hard.
Won’t neutering a model by using only safe data for training create a safe model?
Is there any indication you can actually build hard safety rules into models? It seems like all current guard rails are basically just prompting it extra hard.
> basically just prompting it extra hard If prompting got me into this mess, why can't it get me out of it?
A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
This guys annoys me a an entrepreneur because he gets a sh*t ton of government money and it starves the rest of the ecosystem in Montreal. The previous startup he made with that public money essentially failed. But he is some kind of hero of AI so it's an easy sell for politicians that need to demonstrate they are doing something about AI.
A nonprofit, just like OpenAI ... I don't get the "safe AI" crowd, it's all ghost and mirrors IMO. It's been almost a year to the date since Ilya got his first billion. Later, another two billion came in. Nothing to show. I'm honestly curious since I don't think Ilya is a scammer, but I can't imagine what kind of product they pretend to bring to the market.
AI safety is a genuinely hard problem.
I just can't wrap my head about what the actual product/service is. Let alone something that could be sold for billions.
"Safe AI" is very ambiguous in terms of product.
This guys annoys me a an entrepreneur because he gets a sh*t ton of government money and it starves the rest of the ecosystem in Montreal. The previous startup he made with that public money essentially failed. But he is some kind of hero of AI so it's an easy sell for politicians that need to demonstrate they are doing something about AI.
This is misinformation and you are sharing some very dangerous things online.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is misinformation and you are sharing some very dangerous things online.
It reads like possibly slander, but dangerous? I don't understand how it could be dangerous