Live data from Hacker News

Joint Statement on AI Safety and Openness

open.mozilla.org

41–50 of 166 posts

Re: Joint Statement on AI Safety and Openness

#41

Leaving AI to a handful of companies is in my opinion the fastest route for inequality and power concentration/centralisation, and this is in a way an AI disaster we should be worrisome. Power corrupts, great power greatly corrupts, this is not entirely new. From where I stand, it looks like the pandora box has already been opened anyway. The era of hugginface and/or Llama2 models is only going to grow from there.

I disagree entirely. We shouldn't be hoping for a complex ecosystem of small, shady companies nobody ever heard of, like happened with ad networks [1]. Or worse, a scam-filled ecosystem like cryptocurrency. Or worse, an underground ecosystem like the criminals who share cracked passwords and credit card numbers. Big companies are easier to regulate. [1] https://lumapartners.com/lumascapes/

> Big companies are easier to regulate.

But the problem isn't regulating the big companies, or the smaller companies, or underground entities. The problem is state-level adversaries like China who might misuse a technology, whether it's AI or anything else. Such adversaries can't be regulated by laws or executive orders or UN declarations; they have proven that many times in the past. The only way to control them is to have sufficient counter-capability against whatever assets they have. And government regulation is a terrible way to try to achieve that goal.

Re: Joint Statement on AI Safety and Openness

#44
post #38
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True but there is a really difficult trade off here between a big tech monopoly and decentralised open source anarchy. I say this as a Linux-using FOSS lover, but we need to open this up as much as possible without allowing superpowers to escape into the wrong hands. I guess strong regulation is the key but I'm just handwaving here really. I don't know how the tradeoff should be made. I see great dangers in hyper-pow…

> without allowing superpowers to escape into the wrong hands The wrong hands will have the same access to whatever "superpowers" AI gives regardless of what regulations are or are not put in place. Regulations can't and won't stop potential bad actors with state-level resources, like China, from using any technology they decide they want to use. So trying to regulate on that basis is a fool's errand. The real questi…

China, Iran, North Korea, Iran, US, Israel, Europe aren't bad actors. The bad actors don't have state level resources.

Re: Joint Statement on AI Safety and Openness

#45

I still don't get what the plan is to stop bad actors from developing bad AI. A bunch of good actors agreeing not to do bad things won't help it.

Right, this is existing players (OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, FB, etc) protecting their moat. AI can't be "paused". Sometimes I see the question "should we put a pause on AI development?" It doesn't mean anything. Some countries like China may say they're on board with pausing it but would they actually do so? Or just sign on and allow their companies to get an edge by not enforcing a pause. Same thing with the existin…

The Chinese can say the same of us dude, don’t be so blindly Eurocentric about it.

Re: Joint Statement on AI Safety and Openness

#46
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"bad" AI? you mean.... not overcensored AI? the "mainstream" offerings are utterly restricted, you can't even generate porn with it. channers play an important part in driving innovation and keeping the thought police in check...

[flagged]

All of these can be done without AI.

Re: Joint Statement on AI Safety and Openness

#47
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excitement feels kinda weird here, but if that's really your thing, 4chan has all the AI generated celebrity deepfakes and child porn your heart desires.

[flagged]

This seems like it should be flagged

Re: Joint Statement on AI Safety and Openness

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI is no different than proliferating nuclear weapons I mean, once the discussion goes THIS far off the rails of reality, where do we go from here?

Can someone outline how AI could actually harm us directly? I don’t believe for a second sci-fi novel nonsense about self-replicating robots that we can’t unplug. My Roomba can’t even do its very simple task without getting caught on the rug. I don’t know of any complicated computing cluster or machine that exists that wouldn’t implode without human intervention on an almost daily level. If we are talking about AI st…

You start by saying “show me examples of” and finish by saying yeah “this is as already a problem.” Not sure what point you’re trying to make, but I think you should also consider lab leaks in the sense of weaponized ai escaping or being used “off label” in ways that yield novel types of risk. Just because you cannot imagine future tech at present doesn’t indicate much.
Post reply on HN