421–430 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's been rumours of AI discovering new physics on twitter as well as here on HN. "Solving equations" could mean the same thing.
SINDy does that. https://github.com/dynamicslab/pysindy
Weirdly enough, this sort of lines up with a theory posted on 4chan 4 days ago. The gist being that if the version is formally declared AGI, it can't be licensed to Microsoft and others for commercial gain. As a result Altman wants it not to be called AGI, other board members do. Archived link below. NB THIS IS 4CHAN - THERE WILL OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE. https://archive.ph/sFMXa
> be me > be strong agi
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like the board's mission went off the rails long ago and it acted late. Some snippets from the OpenAI website... "Investing in OpenAI Global, LLC is a high-risk investment" "Investors could lose their capital contribution and not see any return" "It would be wise to view any investment in OpenAI Global, LLC in the spirit of a donation, with the understanding that it may be difficult to know what role money will…
>It seems like you can't continue with the same mission if you're taking billions from public companies which have investors who are very much interested in profit. Why not? Public companies contribute to charities all the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like the board's mission went off the rails long ago and it acted late. Some snippets from the OpenAI website... "Investing in OpenAI Global, LLC is a high-risk investment" "Investors could lose their capital contribution and not see any return" "It would be wise to view any investment in OpenAI Global, LLC in the spirit of a donation, with the understanding that it may be difficult to know what role money will…
>It seems like you can't continue with the same mission if you're taking billions from public companies which have investors who are very much interested in profit. Why not? Public companies contribute to charities all the time.
Weirdly enough, this sort of lines up with a theory posted on 4chan 4 days ago. The gist being that if the version is formally declared AGI, it can't be licensed to Microsoft and others for commercial gain. As a result Altman wants it not to be called AGI, other board members do. Archived link below. NB THIS IS 4CHAN - THERE WILL OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE. https://archive.ph/sFMXa
Here's my challenge: if this is correct, we then have to assume that 95% of the company is purely profit-motivated since they aligned behind Sam. I'm cynical, but I struggle to be that cynical. I would have expected a few more holdouts in the name of caution, EA, etc. Maybe it's a blindness.
Put this on my tombstone after the robots kill me or whatever, but I think all “AI safety” concerns are a wild overreaction totally out of proportion to the actual capabilities of these models. I just haven’t seen anything in the past year which makes me remotely fearful about the future of humanity, including both our continued existence and our continued employment.
Apparently what made this person fearful was grade school math. "Though only performing maths on the level of grade-school students, acing such tests made researchers very optimistic about Q*’s future success, the source said."
But how else can we do it? We learnt how to handle other dangers by trial and error...
One approach is legal. The law is very slow to adapt, and is informed by a history of things gone wrong. The simple answer is that OpenAI has "strict liaility" (meaning they are liable even for an accident) for any damage caused by an AI, like dangerous animals that escape.
I know it seems ridiculous to consider liability when the fate of humanity may be at stake... but this is the language of companies, directors, insurance companies and legal counsel. It is language they understand.