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

Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

jnnnthnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 83 posts

Re: Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

#41

Post by llamaimperative »

123yawaworht456 wrote: post #36
llamaimperative wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we should all thank G-d similar people have been generally in charge of bioengineering and nuclear development labs else we'd have... err nothing. We'd have pretty much nothing at all.

nukes are an excellent example, actually! for how many years did the US maintain its monopoly on nuclear weapons, pray tell?

Well nukes continue to be very difficult to download off the Internet or to rent access to via a web browser.

I haven't seen anyone advocate that the US government needs to be the only entity able to use AI, but if you have, you knocked their socks off with that one.

Re: Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

#42

Post by daniel_iversen »

ctoth wrote: post #26
jnnnthnn wrote: post #2

X.com links are currently broken on HN so I posted a screenshot instead https://x.com/janleike/status/1791498187313963308

The funny thing is I got better OCR throwing this at ChatGPT than at the actual OCR engine I use (Windows default.)

Makes sense since Windows is probably still just using the “latest” Convolutional Neural Network type algorithms for their OCR from 10+ years ago :-)

Re: Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

#43

Post by 123yawaworht456 »

llamaimperative wrote: post #41
123yawaworht456 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nukes are an excellent example, actually! for how many years did the US maintain its monopoly on nuclear weapons, pray tell?

Well nukes continue to be very difficult to download off the Internet or to rent access to via a web browser. I haven't seen anyone advocate that the US government needs to be the only entity able to use AI, but if you have, you knocked their socks off with that one.

>Well nukes continue to be very difficult to download off the Internet or to rent access to via a web browser.

well, the amount of damage you can inflict with an AI model is a few magnitudes lower than that of a nuclear weapon.

>I haven't seen anyone advocate that the US government needs to be the only entity able to use AI, but if you have, you knocked their socks off with that one.

did you miss Sam Altman's world tour last year, talking to the politicians about the ooooh so scary AI being developed by their unregulated competitors? the establishment of oversight committees and regulatory bodies in the US, from where corporate sockpuppets will presume to dictate the the terms of development and application of this technology?

Re: Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

#44

Post by skepticATX »

llamaimperative wrote: post #6

This won't make a dent in the logical armor of AI optimists: [ ] If you are not intimately familiar with the development of AI, your warnings on safety can be disregarded due to your basic ignorance about the development of AI [x] If you are intimately familiar with the development of AI, your warnings on safety can be disregarded due to potential conflicts of interest and koolaid drinking Unbridled optimism lives an…

All I’d like to see from AI safety folks is an empirical argument demonstrating that we’re remotely close to AGI, and that AGI is dangerous.

Sorry, but sci-fi novels are not going to cut it here. If anything, the last year and a half have just supported the notion that we’re not close to AGI.

Re: Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

#45

Post by PeterStuer »

daniel_iversen wrote: post #17

> “Over the past few months […] we were struggling for compute OpenAI literally said they were setting aside 20% of compute to ensure alignment [1] but if you read the fine print, what they said was that they are “dedicating 20% of the compute we’ve secured ‘to date’ to this effort” (emphasis mine). So if their overall compute has increased by 10x then that 20% is suddenly 2%, right? Is OpenAI going to be responsible…

Alignment with whom?

Re: Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

#46

Post by Tenoke »

amenhotep wrote: post #27

"Learn to feel the AGI" shades of > Anticipating the arrival of this all-powerful technology, Sutskever began to behave like a spiritual leader, three employees who worked with him told us. His constant, enthusiastic refrain was “feel the AGI,” a reference to the idea that the company was on the cusp of its ultimate goal. At OpenAI’s 2022 holiday party, held at the California Academy of Sciences, Sutskever led employ…

>"Learn to feel the AGI"

The last tweet is clearly addressing them in OpenAI internal meme-speak given The Culture, 'Feel the AGI', internal emoji etc. references.

Re: Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

#47

Post by Footkerchief »

Aperocky wrote: post #19
llamaimperative wrote: post #6

This won't make a dent in the logical armor of AI optimists: [ ] If you are not intimately familiar with the development of AI, your warnings on safety can be disregarded due to your basic ignorance about the development of AI [x] If you are intimately familiar with the development of AI, your warnings on safety can be disregarded due to potential conflicts of interest and koolaid drinking Unbridled optimism lives an…

That's an over complication, how about my naive belief that LLMs (and increasing the size of) don't lead to AGI. Not saying AGI is impossible, just think the large models and the underlying statistic model beneath are not the path.

LLMS don't have to be smart enough to be AGI. They just have to be smart enough to create AGI. And if creating something smarter than yourself sounds crazy, remember that we were created by simpler ancestors that we now effortlessly dominate.

Re: Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

#48

Post by reducesuffering »

skepticATX wrote: post #44
llamaimperative wrote: post #6

This won't make a dent in the logical armor of AI optimists: [ ] If you are not intimately familiar with the development of AI, your warnings on safety can be disregarded due to your basic ignorance about the development of AI [x] If you are intimately familiar with the development of AI, your warnings on safety can be disregarded due to potential conflicts of interest and koolaid drinking Unbridled optimism lives an…

All I’d like to see from AI safety folks is an empirical argument demonstrating that we’re remotely close to AGI, and that AGI is dangerous. Sorry, but sci-fi novels are not going to cut it here. If anything, the last year and a half have just supported the notion that we’re not close to AGI.

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/uMQ3cqWDPHhjtiesc/agi-ruin-a...

Re: Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

#49

Post by ben_w »

Aperocky wrote: post #34
amenhotep wrote: post #27

"Learn to feel the AGI" shades of > Anticipating the arrival of this all-powerful technology, Sutskever began to behave like a spiritual leader, three employees who worked with him told us. His constant, enthusiastic refrain was “feel the AGI,” a reference to the idea that the company was on the cusp of its ultimate goal. At OpenAI’s 2022 holiday party, held at the California Academy of Sciences, Sutskever led employ…

tbh it smells like they've brought in too much to their own hype. Nothing OpenAI have done more recently suggest to me that they are closer to the AGI. They did create a bunch of other models with different input format that are probably based off pretty much the same thing. And it looks like those other models will be much more expensive to run and burn up their runway sooner.

> AGI

Trouble is, everyone has a different interpretation of those words.

Do you mean they're no closer to "highly autonomous systems that outperform humans at most economically valuable work", or do you mean no closer to "a general-purpose machine-learning based system, even if it's only IQ 85", or do you mean no closer to "a conscious and self-aware artificial mind", or do you mean "a super-intelligent system that beats all humans put together"?

> And it looks like those other models will be much more expensive to run and burn up their runway sooner

I thought "runway" was the metaphor for "before take-off"? They've definitely taken off now. If they were burning more money than they bring in, they could've just not lowered the prices.

Re: Jan Leike's OpenAI departure statement

#50

Post by artninja1988 »

Aperocky wrote: post #34
amenhotep wrote: post #27

"Learn to feel the AGI" shades of > Anticipating the arrival of this all-powerful technology, Sutskever began to behave like a spiritual leader, three employees who worked with him told us. His constant, enthusiastic refrain was “feel the AGI,” a reference to the idea that the company was on the cusp of its ultimate goal. At OpenAI’s 2022 holiday party, held at the California Academy of Sciences, Sutskever led employ…

tbh it smells like they've brought in too much to their own hype. Nothing OpenAI have done more recently suggest to me that they are closer to the AGI. They did create a bunch of other models with different input format that are probably based off pretty much the same thing. And it looks like those other models will be much more expensive to run and burn up their runway sooner.

Agreed. Honestly gpt4o is a massive disappointment. They made it multimodal, but it seems as dumb as ever reasoning wise. I think it's become pretty clear that we've reached diminishing returns with LLMs and AGI isn't coming. Some of OpenAI have realized this and have moved tool full on productization. That said, I do believe some of the people there have genuinely drunk the kool aid.
Post reply on HN