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

31–40 of 64 posts

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#31

Post by Pannoniae »

JohnFen wrote: post #26
flangola7 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

First they came for.....

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#32

Post by SanderNL »

kenjackson wrote: post #14
simbolit wrote: post #10

If they so scared of AI, they could just stop building it.

Turns out that this wouldn't stop others from building it.

Right? That’s why I continue kicking kittens. If I don’t, someone else will. It better be me, because I’ll kick them real gentle.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#33

Post by itake »

JohnFen wrote: post #26
flangola7 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Technology advances have happened many many times in history. But there is always more work to be done.

I was reading Man’s Search For meaning, written shortly after ww2. The author notes that Americans have too much free time. Clearly that is not the case 80 years later.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#34

Post by fnordpiglet »

JohnFen wrote: post #26
flangola7 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Stuffing a genie back in the bottle is the appropriate saying. Instead of trying hard to keep the genie in the hands of a few megacorps for the safety of the children, perhaps the right way to deal with it is to let everyone figure out how to use the technology to create as many jobs as we can? John Henry did beat the steam engine in the end, but at a terrible cost and in no way did it undo the invention. But when I go to a construction site it’s full of highly paid experts with great benefits ensuring the stream engine properly digs the tunnel correctly. Instead of unskilled people slinging hammers in half slavery we have engineers digging twice as many tunnels that are ten times more complex crawling with well employed humans crawling the worksite.

I think worry isn’t the right response. I think the right response is awareness of the issues and broad collaborative innovation to democratize the tool for as many people as possible, and let us build twice as many things that are ten times more complex with the same people working.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#35

Post by skybrian »

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.

Regulatory capture is a risk but concluding "therefore we shouldn't regulate things" is an argument that doesn't work when there's a need to regulate dangerous things, except maybe with hard-core libertarians.

Like, should there be prescription drugs? If you say no, you should be able to get any drug without a prescription, that's pretty out there.

But the question is whether AI is that dangerous, and there's widespread disagreement on that.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#36

Post by JohnFen »

itake wrote: post #33
JohnFen wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Technology advances have happened many many times in history. But there is always more work to be done. I was reading Man’s Search For meaning, written shortly after ww2. The author notes that Americans have too much free time. Clearly that is not the case 80 years later.

> Technology advances have happened many many times in history. But there is always more work to be done.

Long term, yes. But it's also happened many times in history that sudden economic disruption has had a very serious cost. That things might be better in a couple of decades is of no help to people who can't eat or keep a roof over their heads today because of these changes.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#37

Post by jojobaskins »

__loam wrote: post #30
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.

I don't think they meant better in the artistic sense but in the sense that they outperform on metrics?

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#38

Post by JohnFen »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #34
JohnFen wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Stuffing a genie back in the bottle is the appropriate saying. Instead of trying hard to keep the genie in the hands of a few megacorps for the safety of the children, perhaps the right way to deal with it is to let everyone figure out how to use the technology to create as many jobs as we can? John Henry did beat the steam engine in the end, but at a terrible cost and in no way did it undo the invention. But when I…

> I think the right response is awareness of the issues and broad collaborative innovation to democratize the tool for as many people as possible

That is needed long term, but I don't see how it does anything for the more immediate problems. If enough people are out of work, that's a crisis.

The right response, in my opinion, is to be honest about the risks and find ways of mitigating them. I don't see anyone of substance doing anything like that.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#39

Post by torginus »

I guess Big AI is following the Big Pharma playbook - I recently read an article about children being unable to afford Penicillin shots, each costing almost a thousand dollars - which is absolutely infuriating considering any competent chemist can make Penicillin with rudimentary lab equipment, most of the cost being price jacking due to regulatory capture. Probably they are looking to avoid the marginal cost of AI services trending to zero by restricting the supply in a similar way.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#40

Post by TimPC »

itake wrote: post #33
JohnFen wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Technology advances have happened many many times in history. But there is always more work to be done. I was reading Man’s Search For meaning, written shortly after ww2. The author notes that Americans have too much free time. Clearly that is not the case 80 years later.

That was true for horses until the combustion engine came along and it certainly won't be true for humans forever. If we automate all useful work that can be done by someone at 100 IQ or lower than half of the population will be unemployed.
Post reply on HN