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

301–310 of 672 posts

Re: US AI Action Plan

#301

Post by slg »

terminalshort wrote: post #227
slg wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why can't I just chat with an AI bot and get my prescription? Because people have decided that whatever drug you are taking shouldn't be taken without a doctor's oversight. If you have a problem with that conclusion, the response should be lobbying to get that drug reclassified as safe for over-the-counter sale, not completely removing the doctor's oversight from the prescription process. Ironically, your proposal h…

Doctors oversight should be removed (not as an option, but as a requirement) for 90% of all prescriptions. Unless the drug has externalities like antibiotic resistance, is heinously addictive, or is so difficult to administer correctly that you cant take it outside of a hospital, there's no good reason to tell people what they can't put in their bodies. Whether or not your insurance will pay for it without a prescrip…

This is not an argument that has any relevancy to AI. If anything, someone who believes what you say should be against the introduction of AI into the system because your argument is fundamentally that these drugs shouldn't have a gatekeeper. Swapping out one gatekeeper for another, especially with the new gatekeeper being the unknown black box of some AI middleman, won't actually address your complaint.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#302

Post by lotyrin »

andsoitis wrote: post #287
antonvs wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> To them, "objectively reflects the truth" means things like black people are inferior, homosexuality is objectively morally wrong, women are subordinate to men, marriage is only between a biological man and a biological woman, and so on and so on. Who are the “them” in your sentence?

Do... you not know these people? Where do you live and can I move there?

Re: US AI Action Plan

#303

Post by [deleted] »

zmgsabst wrote: post #292
jakelazaroff wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that "anti-woke" or whatever is not balanced. We've constructed statistical models based on enormous corpora of English text, and those models keep telling us that there is not really a statistical difference between whatever Elon Musk is trying to create and MechaHitler! I'm not saying this is conclusive evidence, but I am saying it's our best inference from the data we have so far.

Or that rhetoric like yours is common, so LLMs conflate unrelated ideas — such as opposition to neo-Marxist philosophy and Nazism.

[deleted]

Re: US AI Action Plan

#304

Post by jakelazaroff »

zmgsabst wrote: post #292
jakelazaroff wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is that "anti-woke" or whatever is not balanced. We've constructed statistical models based on enormous corpora of English text, and those models keep telling us that there is not really a statistical difference between whatever Elon Musk is trying to create and MechaHitler! I'm not saying this is conclusive evidence, but I am saying it's our best inference from the data we have so far.

Or that rhetoric like yours is common, so LLMs conflate unrelated ideas — such as opposition to neo-Marxist philosophy and Nazism.

Nazism and anti-Marxism are absolutely not unrelated! And that's not just rhetoric like mine, either: for example, the hero image on the Britannica article "Were the Nazis Socialists?" is a banner at Nazi parade that reads "Death to Marxism". [1]

That doesn't mean that anti-Marxists are all Nazis, or vice versa. But the claim that they're totally unrelated is not correct at all.

[1] https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists

Re: US AI Action Plan

#305

Post by andsoitis »

NewJazz wrote: post #224
andsoitis wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing stops the AI companies from using only energy from renewable sources, right?

Tariffs, regulatory quick sand, political pressure...

Sure anyone can come up with hypothetical threats. What’s your concrete evidence to suggest this will happen?

Re: US AI Action Plan

#307

Post by andsoitis »

dwaltrip wrote: post #185
andsoitis wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yeah, they're going to do all they can to block cheap renewables and give handouts to fossil fuel companies. Many AI people in positions of influence have argued that AI will all but solve the climate crisis. Viewed from that angle, it would make sense that you wouldn’t care about how dirty the sources of energy is on the way to AGI because once there, the climate crisis will be magically solved. Somehow.

They aren't neutral on energy sources or simply agnostic to environmental impact. They are anti-renewable, because renewable = woke. Tribal politics at its best.

> They

Who is the “they” in your sentence?

Re: US AI Action Plan

#308

Post by GolfPopper »

NoImmatureAdHom wrote: post #188
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 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.

Which is a perfectly reasonable position... but I don't see how it has anything to do with crypto scammers pimping three chatbots in a trenchcoat.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#309

Post by eastbound »

hopelite wrote: post #298
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".

“Objective” … “free from to-down ideological bias” … So like making sure everyone knows that 2+2=5 and that we have always been at war with East Asia?

The EU has the same rules. Democracy is only the right to change leaders every few years, not an idealistic way for the people to govern.

Re: US AI Action Plan

#310

Post by gfody »

h4ck_th3_pl4n3t wrote: post #257
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".

I wonder what Chomsky would have to say about this.

that we're literally manufacturing consent
Post reply on HN