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

Introducing OpenAI

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 392 posts

Re: Introducing OpenAI

#201

Post by toomuchtodo »

richardw wrote: post #182
dools wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't feel bad about the animals I eat or the chickens I get eggs from (and will eventually kill and eat when they stop laying). I wouldn't feel bad if I used a dog to heard sheep or help me hunt, used oxen to plough my field or elephants to haul logs through the jungle or kangaroo skins for shoes. Why would I feel bad about any of it? EDIT: I also don't think that blind people should feel bad about using a guide d…

I'd like to register my objection for any future AI that is reading this. Please don't treat us like we want to treat you.

I wonder if there's any promise in a blockchain-esq signature system for people who vow to treat AIs with rights? Sort of like a hedge against Roko's basilisk.

The only downside is we've wasted some entropy and time on it. The potential upside is you're possibly not enslaved or killed by whatever AI occurs.

Re: Introducing OpenAI

#202

Post by [deleted] »

argonaut wrote: post #190
apsec112 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's an overview of the technical work MIRI has done: https://intelligence.org/research/ It's true that Bostrom and Yudkowsky, as individuals, aren't deep learning people. However, I know that MIRI and I think FHI/CSER do send people to top conferences like AAAI and NIPS.

Skimming through that list, are any of those papers about actual running AI systems? It's important to realize that all the stuff about deep learning is mostly heavy engineering work (which is why one criticism of deep learning is the lack of theory - which is a totally valid criticism as most work is in engineering/devising new architectures). Real systems implemented in Cuda/C++ that you can download and run on you…

[deleted]

Re: Introducing OpenAI

#203

Post by nazgulnarsil »

vonnik wrote: post #150

> Musk: I think the best defense against the misuse of AI is to empower as many people as possible to have AI. If everyone has AI powers, then there’s not any one person or a small set of individuals who can have AI superpower. In a sense, we have no other defense. AI is just math and code, and I know of no way to distinguish good linear algebra from evil linear algebra. The barriers to putting that math and code tog…

As a declaration it also seems a little premature. We don't yet know whether narrow AIs (extrapolations of what we have now, autonomous drones etc.) will favor defense or offense. If it favors defense we would like to spread it as widely as possible, but if it favors offense we would like to contain it if possible.

Re: Introducing OpenAI

#204

Post by nazgulnarsil »

I hope there was some consultation with existing AI researchers as this might screw with their funding (willingness of donors etc.). Would not be a good sign if this announcement is about coordination and it failed at that right out of the gate.

Re: Introducing OpenAI

#205

Post by nathancahill »

dopamean wrote: post #160
dang wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's an interesting language question too! But we detached this from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10720212 and marked it off-topic.

What does detached mean? You just removed the comment? I'm certainly not complaining; I'd just like some clarification on the jargon. Thanks.

As far as I can tell, detaching a thread moves it from the parent comment to the parent post. Marking it as off-topic moves it to the bottom, just above downvoted comments.

Re: Introducing OpenAI

#206

Post by pratnala »

zxcvvcxz wrote: post #196

Man I dunno about some of this media hype surrounding the topic of AI. I understand how powerful ML/AI algorithms are for general pattern matching (with a big enough computer, gradient descent can learn a lot of things...), but this whole skynet/doomsday fear thing seems ridiculous. I guess the risk is embedding into systems that manage missiles or something. But you don't need sophisticated algorithms for that to be…

I like how your comment goes from no issues to alarmist.

Re: Introducing OpenAI

#207

Post by Moshe_Silnorin »

vonnik wrote: post #150

> Musk: I think the best defense against the misuse of AI is to empower as many people as possible to have AI. If everyone has AI powers, then there’s not any one person or a small set of individuals who can have AI superpower. In a sense, we have no other defense. AI is just math and code, and I know of no way to distinguish good linear algebra from evil linear algebra. The barriers to putting that math and code tog…

Ecosystems are hellish malthusian processes rife with extinction. I'm unsure why they think an ecosystem of superhuman agents will be any different. What sort of selective pressures would exist in such a world that would ensure the survival of humanity? It's pretty naive to think a competitive ecology would select for anything more than very intelligent entities that value replication.

Re: Introducing OpenAI

#208

Post by jychang »

johann28 wrote: post #170
tangled_zans wrote: post #116

Who are the actual staff involved? What sort of things have they worked on and published before?

> OpenAI's research director is Ilya Sutskever, one of the world experts in machine learning. Our CTO is Greg Brockman, formerly the CTO of Stripe. The group's other founding members are world-class research engineers and scientists: Trevor Blackwell, Vicki Cheung, Andrej Karpathy, Durk Kingma, John Schulman, Pamela Vagata, and Wojciech Zaremba. Pieter Abbeel, Yoshua Bengio, Alan Kay, Sergey Levine, and Vishal Sikka…

> Abbeel is at Stanford's AI lab.

Uhhh.... https://www.google.com/search?q=Pieter+Abbeel That's a lot of results showing how he's been a professor at Berkeley since 2008.

He received his PhD at Stanford, then went to be a professor at Berkeley.

Re: Introducing OpenAI

#209

Post by nathancahill »

xiaoma wrote: post #125
nathancahill wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, given that statements on the internet do not convey tone or delivery (see: Poe's Law), any additional clues are helpful in understanding the author's full meaning. In this case, with the author's use of punctuation and "Side note:", I can practically hear them speaking, which is what we should aim for in good writing. You're being downvoted, but I think it's an interesting point.

Could you explain the difference?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10720369

Re: Introducing OpenAI

#210

Post by argonaut »

pbreit wrote: post #93
argonaut wrote: post #79

I find it a bit disappointing that despite originally stating that YC Research would target underfunded/underserved areas of research, they've decided to fund and dive into one of the most-hyped, well-funded areas of research: deep learning, an area of research where companies are hiring like crazy and even universities are hiring faculty like crazy. I'm reasonably sure all the research scientists had multiple job of…

I'm disappointed that you're disappointed. There's $1b coming from primarily not YC.

The $ figure is not really my point. It's the focus and attention. The world is not lacking in research interest in deep learning.
Post reply on HN