Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI • Hacker News Board

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#341

Post by tern » Tue, May 16, 2023, 4:54 PM UTC

thrway345772 wrote: post #317

brenns10 wrote: post #234

Reminds me of SBF calling for crypto regulations while running FTX. Being seen as friendly to regulations is great for optics compared to being belligerently anti-regulation. You can appear responsible and benevolent, and get more opportunity to weaken regulation by controlling more of the narrative. And hey, if you get end up getting some regulatory capture making competition harder, that's a great benefit too. Open…

FWIW, OpenAI and FTX leadership share the same ideology

This is mostly not true in my experience

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#342

Post by armatav » Tue, May 16, 2023, 4:54 PM UTC

I guess that’s a potential moat.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#343

Post by alephnerd » Tue, May 16, 2023, 4:54 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #270

The members of this subcommittee are [1]: Chair Richard Blumenthal (CT), Amy Klobuchar (MN), Chris Coons (DE), Mazie Hirono (HI), Alex Padilla (CA), Jon Ossoff (GA) Majority Office: 202-224-2823 Ranking Member Josh Hawley (MO), John Kennedy (LA), Marsha Blackburn (TN), Mike Lee (UT), John Cornyn (TX) Minority Office: 202-224-4224 If you’re in those states, please call their D.C. office and read them the comment you’r…

Feel free to call their office but they won't get the message let alone escalate it.

Source: manned phones fielding constituent calls earlier in my career.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#344

Post by unethical_ban » Tue, May 16, 2023, 4:55 PM UTC

tomrod wrote: post #224

unethical_ban wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The below is not an endorsement of any particular regulation. It is a tool which allows any individual to have nearly instant access not only to all the world's public data, but the ability to correlate and research that data to synthesize new information quickly. Without guardrails, someone can have a completely amoral LLM that has the ability to write persuasive manifestos on any kind of extremist movement that pri…

> Without guardrails, someone can have a completely amoral LLM that has the ability to write persuasive manifestos on any kind of extremist movement that prior would have taken someone with intelligence. In an earlier time, we called these "books" and there was some similar backlash. But I digress.

If you can scan city schematics, maps, learn about civil and structural engineering through various textbooks and plot a subway bombing in an afternoon, you're a faster learner than I am.

Let me be clear: everyone in the world is about to have a Jarvis/Enterprise ship's computer/Data/name-your-assistant available to them, but ready and willing to use their power for nefarious purposes. It is not just a matter of reading books. It lowers the barrier on a lot of things, good and bad, significantly.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#345

Post by SamPatt » Tue, May 16, 2023, 4:56 PM UTC

vsareto wrote: post #329

simonbarker87 wrote: post #250

Is this just to put up a barrier to entry to new entrants in the market so they can have a government enforced monopoly?

Why would OpenAI be worried about new entrants that are almost certainly too small to present a business threat? What regulation are they proposing that is actually a serious barrier to making a company around AI? If OpenAI just wants to prevent another OpenAI eating its lunch, the barrier there is raw compute. Companies that can afford that can afford to jump regulatory hurdles.

OpenAI was the new entrant that almost certainly didn't pose a threat to Google.

This is classic regulatory capture.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#346

Post by joshxyz » Tue, May 16, 2023, 4:56 PM UTC

simonbarker87 wrote: post #250

Is this just to put up a barrier to entry to new entrants in the market so they can have a government enforced monopoly?

sir yes sir

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#347

Post by peepeepoopoo5 » Tue, May 16, 2023, 4:57 PM UTC

This would completely destroy an entire industry if they did this. Not just in AI directly, but also secondary and tertiary industries developing their own bespoke models for specialized use cases. This would be a total disaster.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#348

Post by etiam » Tue, May 16, 2023, 4:57 PM UTC

RandomLensman wrote: post #66

digbybk wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m open minded about this, I see people more knowledgeable than me on both sides of the argument. Can someone explain how Geoffrey Hinton can be considered to be clueless?

Not clueless. However, is he an expert in socio-political-economic issues arising from AI or in non-existent AGI? Technical insight into AI might not translate into either.

The expert you set as the bar is purely hypothetical.

To the extent we can get anything like that at all presently, it's going to be people whose competences combine and generalize to cover a complex situation, partially without precedent.

Personally I don't really see that we'll do much better in that regard than a highly intelligent and free-thinking biological psychologist with experience of successfully steering the international ML research community through creating the present technology, and with input from contacts at the forefront of the research field and information overview from Google.

Not even Hinton knows for sure whats going to happen of course, but if you're suggesting his statements are to be discounted because he's not a member of some sort of credentialed trade that are the ones equipped to tell us the future on this matter, I'd sure like to who they supposedly are.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#349

Post by mempko » Tue, May 16, 2023, 5:00 PM UTC

Let's not forget, the that behind Sam and OpenAI is Microsoft, a monopolist. Behind Bard is Google, another monopolist. In this context, for major corporations asking for regulation suggests to me they want a mote.

What we need is democratization of AI, not it being controlled by a small cabal of tech companies and governments.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#350

Post by brkebdocbdl » Tue, May 16, 2023, 5:01 PM UTC

shawabawa3 wrote: post #322

candiddevmike wrote: post #174

I'm sad that we've lost the battle with calling these things AI. LLMs aren't AI, and I don't think they're even a path towards AI.

If LLMs aren't AI nothing else is AI so far either What exactly does AI mean to you?

thanks for exemplifying the problem.

intelligence is what allows one to understand phrases and then construct meaning from it. e.g. the paper is yellow. AI will need to have a concept of paper and yellow. and the to be verb. LLMs just mash samples and form a basic map of what can be throw in one bucket or another with no concept of anything or understanding.

basically, AI is someone capable of minimal criticism. LLMs are someone who just sit in front of the tv and have knee jerk reactions without an ounce of analytical though. qed.