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

Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 178 posts

Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment

#51

Post by reb »

ActorNightly wrote: post #42
jadbox wrote: post #3

This seems... dangerously careless. What if it uses the internet to seek out zero day vulnerabilities and exploit them routinely? Sure humans also do this, but we're talking about a new level of 0day exploit carried out at scale. Sure, maybe it won't, but do you trust a hallucinating, left-brained, internet-trained intelligence to be strictly logical and mindful for all it's actions that is taking self autonomously (…

I honestly appreciate new woke meta of fearmongering against sentient AIs. It's a welcome break from the anti capitalism woke meta.

Breaking news from HN user ActorNightly: Anti-AI Visionary Elon Musk is a woke soyboy now. Will antifa's reign of terror ever end?

Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment

#52

Post by amrb »

smodad wrote: post #37
sorokod wrote: post #12

AI needn't even try to escape, the clueless humans will plug it into reallity by themselves. Given this totally expected attitude I hope that the base models will never be released to the general population.

I have to disagree. Not releasing it to the public makes it more dangerous. One major downside of all development being done in private is that the AI can very easily be co-opted by our self-appointed betters and you end up with a different kind of dystopia where every utterance, thought and act is recorded and monitored by an AI to make sure no one "steps out of line." I think the solution is releasing it to the gen…

So there's this little problem, say we can track X number of malware with the current security defenders. But ChatGPT lowers the barrier to programmer to a point which the average teenage could do malware, we now get a wave of hacks going on.. like whats the response there?

Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment

#53

Post by jjoonathan »

startupsfail wrote: post #43
smodad wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to disagree. Not releasing it to the public makes it more dangerous. One major downside of all development being done in private is that the AI can very easily be co-opted by our self-appointed betters and you end up with a different kind of dystopia where every utterance, thought and act is recorded and monitored by an AI to make sure no one "steps out of line." I think the solution is releasing it to the gen…

I agree. Overall the whole situation feels like we’ve just entered atomic age and are proliferating plutonium, while selling shiny radioactive toys [I’m actually pretty serious here, the effects of prolonged interactions with an AI haven’t been evaluated yet, technically there is even a possibility of overriding a weak personality]. But it still feels like it is much safer to let GPT-4 loose and assess the consequenc…

Yes. The only possible way this gets taken seriously is if a mediocre AI tries a power move, causes some damage, and faceplants before it's too big to stop.

Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment

#54

Post by ftxbro »

Teever wrote: post #48
ftxbro wrote: post #22

I wonder are they using these autonomous GPT loops to control DAOs? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_autonomous_organ...

Since GPT4 was released I have been trying to find a paper that I read a few years ago, for some reason your comment was the spark that made me remember the title: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2954173

Algorithmic entities! It makes me think they will insert the concept of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_person into more legislation. Also they will have to change the name of 'algorithmic entities' because the word 'algorithm' is so pre-2020s. They will have to say 'AI' instead!

Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment

#55

Post by startupsfail »

jliptzin wrote: post #49
sorokod wrote: post #12

AI needn't even try to escape, the clueless humans will plug it into reallity by themselves. Given this totally expected attitude I hope that the base models will never be released to the general population.

Can someone explain to me what is so dangerous here? Do people actually think we’re headed towards James Cameron’s terminator and soon ChatGPT will become self aware and destroy us? I am far more afraid of tools to edit viruses becoming cheap and widely available, then one nutjob in his garage can engineer and release smallpox v2.0 and wipe out 90% of the worldwide population before we even know what hit us. Or you k…

The problem is, human intelligence is likely also based on a similar advanced chat bot setup.

While GPT-4 only performs as good as top-10th percentile of human students taking an exam (a professional in the field can do much more than this), it is notable that as a generalist GPT-4 would outperform such professionals. And GPT-4 is much faster than a human. And we have not yet evaluated GPT-4 working in its optimal setting (access to optimal external tools). And we have not yet seen GPT-5 or 6 or 8.

So, get ready for an interesting ride.

Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment

#56

Post by mjr00 »

ALittleLight wrote: post #45
roflyear wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not really sure why we are assuming that these language models ever can have any form of intelligence? To me, this is just like saying "we don't know if the latest CPU released by intel will enable Linux to become intelligent"

Language models obviously have some form of intelligence right now. You can have GPT-4 take SAT tests, play Chess, write poetry, predict what will happen in different social scenarios, answer theory of mind questions, ask questions, solve programming puzzles, etc. There are some measures that GPTs are clearly below human levels, some where they are far beyond, and some where they are within human range. The question…

> Language models obviously have some form of intelligence right now.

This is not "obvious" in any sense of the word. At best, it's highly debatable.

Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment

#58

Post by startupsfail »

jjoonathan wrote: post #53
startupsfail wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Overall the whole situation feels like we’ve just entered atomic age and are proliferating plutonium, while selling shiny radioactive toys [I’m actually pretty serious here, the effects of prolonged interactions with an AI haven’t been evaluated yet, technically there is even a possibility of overriding a weak personality]. But it still feels like it is much safer to let GPT-4 loose and assess the consequenc…

Yes. The only possible way this gets taken seriously is if a mediocre AI tries a power move, causes some damage, and faceplants before it's too big to stop.

I would not be surprised, if GPT-4 (in its optimal environment, with access to a well-working external memory, prompted in a right way, etc) is already capable enough to do an interesting power move.

Re: Auto-GPT: An Autonomous GPT-4 Experiment

#59

Post by Super_Jambo »

quonn wrote: post #34
visarga wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just opening it up to the public gives the AI that many vectors of action in the real world - us.

But not in a way that‘s more problematic than human-to-human communication.

quantity has a quality all of it's own.
Post reply on HN