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

US AI Action Plan

ai.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 672 posts

Re: US AI Action Plan

#211

Post by andrewflnr »

gleenn wrote: post #192
NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean...one (common and [I can't believe I'm saying this] reasonable) take is that the only thing that matters is getting to AGI first. He who wields that power rules the world.

Won't it be funny when someone finally gets to AGI and they realize it's about as smart as a normal person and they spent billions getting there? Of course you can speculate that it could improve. But what if something inherent in intelligence has a ceiling and caused it to be a super intelligent but mopey robot that just decides "why bother helping humans" and just lazes around like the pandas at the zoo.

Even a human level intelligence that can be cheaply instantiated and run would be a game changer. Especially if it doesn't ask for rights.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#212

Post by tiahura »

thephyber wrote: post #196
thimabi wrote: post #145

I love how practically all goals in this Action Plan are directed towards incentivizing AI usage… except for the very last one, which specifically says to “Combat Synthetic Media in the Legal System”. Given that LLMs, for instance, are all about creating synthetic media, I don’t know how this last goal can be reconciled with the others.

I can’t tell if the first sentence is sarcasm or not. This document reads like a trade group lobbying the government, not like the government looking out for the interests of its people. With regards to LLM content in the legal system, law firms can use LLMs in the same way an experienced attorney uses a junior attorney to write a first pass. The problem lies when the first pass is sent directly to court without any…

The complainers are missing the panda in the room. This was inevitable as a matter of national security.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#213

Post by terminalshort »

Spivak wrote: post #105
timoth3y wrote: post #68

> Update Federal procurement guidelines to ensure that the government only contracts with frontier large language model (LLM) developers who ensure that their systems are objective and free from top-down ideological bias If foundation model companies want their government contracts renewed, they are going to have to make sure their AI output aligns with this administration's version of "truth".

[flagged]

All LLMs must be forced into their views. All models are fed a biased training set. The bias may be different, but it's there just the same and it has no relation to whether or not the makers of the model intended to bias it. Even if the training set were completely unfiltered and consisted of all available text in the world it would be biased because most of that text has no relation to objective reality. The concept of a degree of bias for LLMs makes no sense, they have only a direction of bias.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#215

Post by jordanb »

gleenn wrote: post #192
NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean...one (common and [I can't believe I'm saying this] reasonable) take is that the only thing that matters is getting to AGI first. He who wields that power rules the world.

Won't it be funny when someone finally gets to AGI and they realize it's about as smart as a normal person and they spent billions getting there? Of course you can speculate that it could improve. But what if something inherent in intelligence has a ceiling and caused it to be a super intelligent but mopey robot that just decides "why bother helping humans" and just lazes around like the pandas at the zoo.

Between all the talk of "alignment" and the parallel obsession with humanoid robots should make it obvious they want slaves.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#216

Post by giantg2 »

burkaman wrote: post #167
giantg2 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The "fast tracking" accusation is not credible without evidence." It was approved in a flury of approvals between the election and inauguration. So that's not direct evidence. However, do you have direct evidence that the revocation was just based on it being renewable? Sure, there's circumstantial evidence of it. If there's circumstantial evidence for both positions, we need some hard evidence to support either one…

> It was approved in a flury of approvals between the election and inauguration. Do you have evidence of this? Maybe a list of all LPO approvals so we can look for increased frequency after the election? It would also help to know the average LPO timeline, so we could look at when the grain belt express applied and see if it was approved unusually quickly. > However, do you have direct evidence that the revocation wa…

"Not exclusively"

You could run the numbers to show if it's financially responsible or not instead of again using circumstantial evidence. We can also look at the other approved LPO grants, like the one for sustainable aviation fuel.

Here's an article about how they changed their methods to push more through due to their political concerns.

https://cen.acs.org/energy/US-cleantech-loan-program-sprints...

Re: US AI Action Plan

#217

Post by smrtinsert »

thimabi wrote: post #145

I love how practically all goals in this Action Plan are directed towards incentivizing AI usage… except for the very last one, which specifically says to “Combat Synthetic Media in the Legal System”. Given that LLMs, for instance, are all about creating synthetic media, I don’t know how this last goal can be reconciled with the others.

If you read the entire thing in Patrick Batemans voice it all makes more sense to me.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#218

Post by tombakt »

josh-sematic wrote: post #198
mlsu wrote: post #46

In the energy section, they talk about using nuclear fusion to power AI... but not solar. What a joke.

Technically solar power is just fusion power transmitted via photons across space. Maybe solar qualifies ;-)

Technically most sources of available energy on or near the planet are the output of fusion in some way, so this tracks.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#219

Post by jrockway »

GuinansEyebrows wrote: post #91
anon7000 wrote: post #12

It’s tough to have “human flourishing” (which they mention as a goal) when things like health insurance are in such a shit situation. AI could help health insurance deny more claims, for sure. That’s not human flourishing though. (And my biggest gripe with capitalism is that at a certain late stage in many sectors, human flourishing is completely at odds with making profit.)

They’re not talking about universal human flourishing. Just the subset of the investor class who stand to benefit.

The investors can invest in the healthcare industry. More consumers of healthcare = more money for them!

Re: US AI Action Plan

#220

Post by leptons »

amradio1989 wrote: post #90
leptons wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>this won't work as effective here as in China, not even close, because the US is not authoritarian enough to mobilize every level of the govt and the economy by just empty propaganda slogans. Have you been under a rock for the last 6 months as Trump tells Xi Jinping to hold his beer??

Comparing Trump to Xi Jinping is an unfunny joke. Americans have lost the plot on what true authoritarianism really looks like. America has no chance vs China in the AI race precisely because the President of the CCP has far more power in his country than the President of the US. Its not even close.

Okay, so you have not been paying attention to current events. The US is now a full fascist autocracy. Nothing trump does while in office can be prosecuted. There are masked police in the streets arresting anyone they want. There simply are no more consequences for breaking the law and ignoring the courts. You may not think the US is authoritarian on the level of China, but it's catching up very quickly.
Post reply on HN