The dismal level of discourse about this bill shows that Humanity is utterly ill equipped to deal with the problems AI poses for our society.
Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047
361–370 of 514 posts
Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a wise SysAdmin once told me when I was struggling with my tone in writing: “assume what you’re writing will be read aloud in Court someday.”
It’s probably a google search away, but if I’ve typed it slack/outlook/whatever, but not sent it because I then thought better of it, did the app still record it somewhere? I’m almost sure it has to be and I would like to apologize in advance to my senior leadership…
That depends greatly on your tooling, your company, as well as the skills and ethics of your Enterprise IT team.
Generally speaking, it’s in ours’ and the company’s best interests to keep as little data as possible for two big reasons: legal discovery and cost. Unless we’re explicitly required to retain historical records, it’s a legal and fiscal risk to keep excess data around.
That said, there are situations where your input is captured and stored regardless of whether it’s sent. As you said, whether it does or not is often a simple search away.
Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wouldn't take anything they said seriously. Also I clicked two of those links and found no allegations of rape, See https://4w.pub/male-inmate-charged-with-raping-woman-inside-... . This is the inevitable consequence of SB132, and similar laws elsewhere.
Rape is endemic throughout the prison industrial complex, protections for prisoners are nowhere good enough. Subjecting transwomen to rape in men’s prisons isn’t the solution. The JD Vance/Peter Thiel/SSC rationalist sphere is such a joke. Just a bunch of pretentious bigots who think they’re better than the “stupid” bigots.
> Rape is endemic throughout the prison industrial complex, protections for prisoners are nowhere good enough.
The most effective safeguarding measure against this for female prisoners is the segregation of inmates by sex.
SB132 has demolished this protection for women in Californian prisons and, as the linked articles discuss, we now see the awful and entirely avoidable consequences of this law, within just a few years of it being enacted. Exactly as women's rights advocates made legislators aware would happen in their unfortunately futile efforts to halt SB132 from being passed.
Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047
#364Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and mandates audit requirements to prove that your models won't help people cause disasters Audits cannot prove anything and they offer no value when planning for the future. They're purely a retrospective tool that offers insights into potential risk factors. > and can be turned off. I really wish legislators would operate inside reality instead of a Star Trek episode.
This snide dismissiveness around “sci-fi” scenarios, while capabilities continue to grow, seems incredibly naïve and foolish. Many of you saying stuff like this were the same naysayers who have been terribly wrong about scaling for the last 6-8 years or people who only started paying attention in the last two years.
The AI doomsday folk had an even worse track record over the past decade. There was supposed to be mass unemployment of truck drivers years ago. According to CCP Grey's Human's Need Not Apply[1] from 10 years ago, the robot Baxter was supposed to take over many low skilled jobs (Baxter was continued in 2018 after it failed to achieve commercial success).
Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would you change it? The WSJ article already contains his reasoning, plus a lot of other interesting content from major players
Someone emailed and suggested it. I looked at the pdf and it seemed to be more substantive than the usual political statement, so I sort of trusted that it would be better. Also it's not paywalled. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41690454 remains pinned to the top of the thread, so people have the opportunity to read both. (Actually we usually prefer the best third-party article to press releases, but nothing's…
I usually prefer the press release and only read a third party report if I'm looking for more context. So thanks for making it easy to find the primary source of the news here.
Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047
#366Excellent move by Newsom. We have a very active legislature, but it's been extremely bandwagon-y in recent years. I support much of Wiener's agenda, particularly his housing policy, but this bill was way off the mark. It was basically a torpedo against open models. Market leaders like OpenAI and Anthropic weren't really worried about it, or about open models in general. Its supporters were the also-rans like Musk [1]…
why would Google, Microsoft and OpenAI oppose a torpedo against open models? Aren't they positioned to benefit the most?
Because it's a law that first intended to put opensource developers in jail.
Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047
#367The immediate danger of large AI models isn't that they'll turn the earth to paperclips it's that we'll create fraud as a service and have a society where nothing can be trusted. I'd be all for a law (however clumsy) that made image, audio or video content produced by models with over X parameters to be marked with metadata saying it's AI generated. Creating models that don't tag their output as such would be banned.…
> Creating models that don't tag their output as such would be banned.
This is just silly. Anyone would be able to disable this tagging in an open model.
Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047
#368[dead]
Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047
#369I am disappointed that there are no climate change regulations on AI models. Large scale ML businesses are massive carbon emitters, not counting the whimsical training of NNs by every other IT person. This needs to be regulated.
California already has cap and trade. There doesn't seem to be a need for further regulation. If there's a problem with emissions, adjust the pricing. That's the purpose of cap and trade.
Re: Gavin Newsom vetoes SB 1047
#370I’m so sick of people Restricting freedoms and access to knowledge in the name safety. Tyranny always comes in the form of it’s for your own good/safety
Sure, why we just not let everyone to build nukes and use them on anyone they don't like? Knowledge is the power. The BEST power you can get.
You cannot seriously compare nuclear materials delivery / handling to the creation of model weights and computation