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

If AI scaling is to be shut down, let it be for a coherent reason

scottaaronson.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 475 posts

Re: If AI scaling is to be shut down, let it be for a coherent reason

#41

Post by yreg »

nemo44x wrote: post #12

So what part exactaly needs banning? Transformer technology? The amount of data used as input to the program? Number of GPUs allowed? Otherwise you’re just trying to ban a company that has been more innovative than anyone else. Why should they stop? Any talk of a ban or limiting action needs to be specific. Meanwhile instead of fear mongering why not work on developing AI resistant tech?

Total GPU performance according to EY and the limit should be decrease in the future as training gets more efficient.

(Not that I agree)

Re: If AI scaling is to be shut down, let it be for a coherent reason

#43

Post by detrites »

nl wrote: post #11

Why are we even bothering talking about this? It's Gary Marcus "neural networks don't really work" suddenly discovering they do, and literally trying to shut down research in that area while keeping his prefered research areas funded. We know a bunch of the people whose names are on the letter didn't sign it (eg Yann Lecunn who said he disagreed with the premise and didn't sign it). I'm so offended by the idea of thi…

A great many would likely join you, making this entire fiasco a time-wasting distraction, at best, and grave risk at worst. The technologies will continue to be developed, moratorium or not. A moratorium only enables the hidden to get there first.

The risks need to be discussed and understood, along with the benefits, and publicly. That's the only sensible way forward. Denying that the technology is here already and pretending it can be "paused" doesn't assist in alleviating their concerns.

It's absurd to think any of it can be put back inside the box it came out of. Now that it is here, how best to mitigate any bad sides it may have? Simple, continue to develop it - as it will be the only viable source of effective counter-measures.

Re: If AI scaling is to be shut down, let it be for a coherent reason

#44

Post by seydor »

spaceman_2020 wrote: post #25

A little off-topic, but does anyone wonder what kind of AI tech the CIA or DARPA or the NSA might have? Or what they might be building? It's a little scary that a small private company could create an AI that has dominated headlines for over a month now. Surely, the folks at NSA, who have more data than anyone else, have taken notice and are working on something of their own. Am I being paranoid about a potential too…

Darpa has the NNN program for non-invasive brain machine interface. Once the hardware is in place, we can plug into any AI system

Re: If AI scaling is to be shut down, let it be for a coherent reason

#45

Post by alchemist1e9 »

spaceman_2020 wrote: post #25

A little off-topic, but does anyone wonder what kind of AI tech the CIA or DARPA or the NSA might have? Or what they might be building? It's a little scary that a small private company could create an AI that has dominated headlines for over a month now. Surely, the folks at NSA, who have more data than anyone else, have taken notice and are working on something of their own. Am I being paranoid about a potential too…

Not at all off topic because any slow down on public research just lets all such shadow actors get even further ahead.

We have to guess that top level intel agencies probably had gpt 5+ level LLMs for several years potentially. I’ve been wondering if that is actually partially why the propaganda wars or social media games have really escalated between nation states.

In other words that sense of things been getting weird recently might not only be us all getting old, but they actually had this level of LLM tech already.

Re: If AI scaling is to be shut down, let it be for a coherent reason

#46

Post by _qfi9 »

1827162 wrote: post #26
nl wrote: post #11

Why are we even bothering talking about this? It's Gary Marcus "neural networks don't really work" suddenly discovering they do, and literally trying to shut down research in that area while keeping his prefered research areas funded. We know a bunch of the people whose names are on the letter didn't sign it (eg Yann Lecunn who said he disagreed with the premise and didn't sign it). I'm so offended by the idea of thi…

Assuming the training is based on public data, then making it illegal is like a "thought crime" where the state is trying to prohibit carrying out certain computations. Well if I believe the government has no right to control my thoughts, then I believe it has no right to control whatever computation I do on my private computer as well. Down with these ** control freaks, so much of everything nowadays prioritizes saf…

i have a libertarian bent but there are definitely some computations of questionable nature that probably shouldn't be lega, e.g. designing a super virus to wipe out humanity, or a super computer virus to encrypt all memory on planet earth.

where to draw the line i have no idea

Re: If AI scaling is to be shut down, let it be for a coherent reason

#47

Post by hh3k0 »

1827162 wrote: post #29
computerex wrote: post #14

I read the times article, and I also watched Lex Fridman's talk with Eliezer Yudkowsky. Frankly I don't think he is qualified, and I don't understand why anyone is even giving him any credence. His argument is literally: > A mis-aligned super AGI will result in the death of humanity I ask, how . He is making reductive logical leaps that don't make sense. It's FUD.

Well the first thing we can do is start disconnecting safety critical infrastructure from the Internet and/or radio networks... This stuff should never have been online in the first place.

Yeah, there already is a lot of potential for previously unseen damage.

Just disturbing shipping and food supply/distribution systems could be disastrous.

Re: If AI scaling is to be shut down, let it be for a coherent reason

#48

Post by Godel_unicode »

realce wrote: post #17
lwhi wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

Because the NSA isn't going to stop, the CCP isn't going to stop. Anyone who doesn't stop is a threat to my personal freedom, so the only logical reaction to me is to empower yourself as well as possible and keep training.

Huh? How does someone else’s possession of a LLM threaten your personal freedom? How does training your own counteract that? They’re not Pokémon…

Re: If AI scaling is to be shut down, let it be for a coherent reason

#49

Post by dgellow »

The idea that you can even ban it sounds so incoherent. It’s a worldwide research topic, lot of it is done in the open, only require retail hardware, can be done anonymously and in a distributed fashion. A 6 month or 6 years US ban would just mean other countries will catch-up, but that doesn’t do anything regarding AI apocalypse fears.

Re: If AI scaling is to be shut down, let it be for a coherent reason

#50

Post by nl »

lkbm wrote: post #32
nl wrote: post #11

Why are we even bothering talking about this? It's Gary Marcus "neural networks don't really work" suddenly discovering they do, and literally trying to shut down research in that area while keeping his prefered research areas funded. We know a bunch of the people whose names are on the letter didn't sign it (eg Yann Lecunn who said he disagreed with the premise and didn't sign it). I'm so offended by the idea of thi…

On Twitter, it was "multi-blillionaires [Elon Musk] want to keep us down!" In the HN open letter thread it was "All the companies falling behind want a chance to catch up." Now it's "Gary Marcus". The letter was signed by a lot of people, including many AI researchers, including people working on LLMs. Any dismissal that reduces to [one incumbent interest] opposes this" is missing the mark. A lot of people, incumbent…

I don't particularly care about crowds on Twitter or HN. Musk has lots of money but can't stop me spending mine.

Marcus said:

> We must demand transparency, and if we don’t get it, we must contemplate shutting these projects down.

https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/the-sparks-of-agi-or-the-e...

(While at the same time still saying "it's nothing to do with AGI")

Post reply on HN