Quite impressive how many AI companies Daniel Gross has had a hand in lately. Carmack, this, lots of other promising companies. I expect him to be quite a big player once some of these pays off in 10 years or so.
Safe Superintelligence Inc.
211–220 of 1001 posts
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#212[flagged]
SSI technically. Super-Sized, you know?
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#213Remember when OpenAI was focusing on building "open" AI? This is a cool mission statement but it doesn't mean anything right now. Everyone loves a minimalist HTML website and guarantees of safety but who knows what this is actually going to shake down to be.
Isn't Ilya out of OpenAI partly for leaving Open part of OpenAI?
No, lol—Ilya liked ditching the “open” part, he was an early advocate for closed-source. He left OpenAI because he was concerned about safety, felt Sam was moving too fast.
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#214I'm still unconvinced safety is a concern at the model level. Any software wrongly used can be dangerous, e.g. Therac-25, 737 MAX, Fujitsu UK Post scandal... Also maybe I spent too much time in the cryptocurrency space but it doesn't help prefix "Safe" has been associated with scams like SafeMoon.
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#215> Building safe superintelligence (SSI) is the most important technical problem of our time. Call me a cranky old man but the superlatives in these sorts of announcements really annoy me. I want to ask: Have you surveyed every problem in the world? Are you aware of how much suffering there is outside of your office and how unresponsive it has been so far to improvements in artificial intelligence? Are you really sayi…
I think the idea is that a safe super intelligence would help solve those problems. I am skeptical because the vast majority are social coordination problems, and I don’t see how a machine intelligence no matter how smart can help with that.
Exactly. Or who gets the results of its outputs. How do we prioritize limited compute?
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#216> Building safe superintelligence (SSI) is the most important technical problem of our time. Call me a cranky old man but the superlatives in these sorts of announcements really annoy me. I want to ask: Have you surveyed every problem in the world? Are you aware of how much suffering there is outside of your office and how unresponsive it has been so far to improvements in artificial intelligence? Are you really sayi…
It certainly is the most important technical problem of our time, if we end up developing such a system. That conditional makes all the difference.
[dead]
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#217Glad to see Ilya is back in a position to contribute to advancing AI. I wonder how they are going to manage to pay the kinds of compensation packages that truly gifted AI researchers can make now from other companies that are more commercially oriented. Perhaps they can find people who are ideologically driven and/or are already financially independent. It's also hard to see how they will be able to access enough com…
I think they will easily find enough capable altruistic people for this mission.
I mean SBF was into Altruism - look how that turned out....
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#218Quite impressive how many AI companies Daniel Gross has had a hand in lately. Carmack, this, lots of other promising companies. I expect him to be quite a big player once some of these pays off in 10 years or so.
What's Carmack?
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren’t. – Margaret Thatcher
Or: "Any man who must say, "I am the King", is no true king." - Tywin Lannister
No True Scotsman fallacy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman?useskin=vecto...
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#220I am not on the bleeding edge of this stuff. I wonder though: How could a safe super intelligence out compete an unrestricted one? Assuming another company exists (maybe OpenAI) that is tackling the same goal without spending the cycles on safety, what chance do they have to compete?
The problem is the training data. If you take care of alignment at that level the performance is as good as an unrestricted one, except for things you removed like making explosives or ways to commit suicide.
But that costs almost as much as training on the data, hundreds of millions. And I'm sure this will be the new "secret sauce" by Microsoft/Meta/etc. And sadly nobody is sharing their synthetic data.