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

Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 64 posts

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#51

Post by fnordpiglet »

JohnFen wrote: post #38
fnordpiglet wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stuffing a genie back in the bottle is the appropriate saying. Instead of trying hard to keep the genie in the hands of a few megacorps for the safety of the children, perhaps the right way to deal with it is to let everyone figure out how to use the technology to create as many jobs as we can? John Henry did beat the steam engine in the end, but at a terrible cost and in no way did it undo the invention. But when I…

> I think the right response is awareness of the issues and broad collaborative innovation to democratize the tool for as many people as possible That is needed long term, but I don't see how it does anything for the more immediate problems. If enough people are out of work, that's a crisis. The right response, in my opinion, is to be honest about the risks and find ways of mitigating them. I don't see anyone of subs…

I’ll be honest and perhaps unkind. I do not know there’s anything to be done but lean into it and use the tool to help. Trying to fence it in and hope things never change because of it will be impossible and make things worse. By exploiting the tool and figuring out ways to make it an adjunct to human effort as quickly as possible is the only way forward. But disruptive things are disruptive particularly to those who resist it and put themselves against the change. Those who grab onto it and ride it will do well.

Large language models are most a threat to writers. But if you’ve used them enough you’ll realize it’s a tool shaped by the humans ability to write. Prompting to effect is not trivial, and the quality of the response is greatly informed not just by the intention but by the style of language and the quality of the words, the skillful manipulation of language that generates more language. These models have no agency or intellect, and their output is simply a likely continuation of the humans promoting. I imagine skilled writers can find they can do much more and better if they learn to master language tools, and they’ll still be the author and still be writing. People unskilled with language will be at an immense disadvantage using these tools.

However the delta will be much narrower, and people who are otherwise unable to convey themselves effectively but have great ideas will finally be heard. Those who are skilled at conveying themselves and manipulating through language but are poor in ideas will not be nearly as powerful. That will be a major realignment. And those who are in power now by virtue of their gift won’t give up ground to those who are elevated by the tool to take their place.

These are going to be painful changes for a lot of people. Pain is never good. But it’s too late to reverse, so those who adapt and learn will lead. And those who try to dig faster than the machine won’t.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#52

Post by woeirua »

olddustytrail wrote: post #49
woeirua wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of mentality is going to blowback on AI researchers very quickly. When the job losses start mounting politicians are going to need a very persuasive answer as to why we should let millions of people be thrown onto the streets so that a few can become absurdly rich. We will either: have a well-thought out, empathetic plan to resolve this issue, or the mob will burn down the data centers. Your choice.

I think you misunderstood the mentality. When there are hundreds of AI cults desperately trying to evolve their AI to be the New One True God who will make them all billionaires, leading to civil wars breaking out in every first world country simultaneously, job losses will be the least of your worries.

This is not realistic due to the costs associated with training the models. At least for the foreseeable future.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#53

Post by woeirua »

Pannoniae wrote: post #46
woeirua wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of mentality is going to blowback on AI researchers very quickly. When the job losses start mounting politicians are going to need a very persuasive answer as to why we should let millions of people be thrown onto the streets so that a few can become absurdly rich. We will either: have a well-thought out, empathetic plan to resolve this issue, or the mob will burn down the data centers. Your choice.

You are 100% right. Inequality can only be sustained when most people see a way up, so they feel "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" instead of being poor. When things get to a point where they feel like anything they do is a dead end and there is no chance of breaking out of poverty, that's when things get very nasty and society gets shaken up fundamentally.

I think humanity self-destructs if it gets close to the singularity while still in a capitalistic society. You either immediately transition to socialism or have civil war erupt in every country simultaneously.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#54

Post by __loam »

jojobaskins wrote: post #37
__loam wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes there are so many better ways to produce ethically dubious, derivative trash.

I don't think they meant better in the artistic sense but in the sense that they outperform on metrics?

I'm snarking on this guy because I don't care which model we're talking about. Stability might perform better in whatever quantitative metric we want to use, I just think using models like this also makes you a hack that doesn't understand or care about making things.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#55

Post by __loam »

GaggiX wrote: post #42
__loam wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes there are so many better ways to produce ethically dubious, derivative trash.

Like tracing artwork with a pencil, these models are unfortunately too transformative compared to humans to compete with them in creating derivative content. Perhaps AGI will come to help us.

I think continuing to make fun of these people in public is a better solution than AGI

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#56

Post by kenjackson »

Pannoniae wrote: post #29
kenjackson wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between regulation and self-censoring. Major League Baseball bans a bunch of behavior that is legal from their players. Other baseball leagues could permit such behavior. This is about both defining the regulations and practices. Other companies can have different practices. Fox News and MSNBC both report the news, but do so with very different principles and practices. But they are both beholden…

"But I imagine bland sanitization will be a feature of some versus others. The market will settle some of this, but you're short-sighted if you think the market will be the arbiter of it all." Bland sanitization is bad for almost everyone. It will destroy society if not regulated... I certainly wouldn't want to live in a world where everything is converging towards rightthink and everything else gets memoryholed. AI…

If it converges it’s because that’s what people want.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#57

Post by Pannoniae »

kenjackson wrote: post #56
Pannoniae wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"But I imagine bland sanitization will be a feature of some versus others. The market will settle some of this, but you're short-sighted if you think the market will be the arbiter of it all." Bland sanitization is bad for almost everyone. It will destroy society if not regulated... I certainly wouldn't want to live in a world where everything is converging towards rightthink and everything else gets memoryholed. AI…

If it converges it’s because that’s what people want.

No, it's what the leading 2 or 3 AI companies want. Do people like the enshittification of the internet? Most likely not, but that's what the platforms want so that's what happens.

It's not what the people want, it's whoever runs the AI wants... This is why they should be regulated so they can't have a negatively distorting effect on society with bias and censoring ideas which they don't like.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#58

Post by itake »

TimPC wrote: post #40
itake wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technology advances have happened many many times in history. But there is always more work to be done. I was reading Man’s Search For meaning, written shortly after ww2. The author notes that Americans have too much free time. Clearly that is not the case 80 years later.

That was true for horses until the combustion engine came along and it certainly won't be true for humans forever. If we automate all useful work that can be done by someone at 100 IQ or lower than half of the population will be unemployed.

No. I think that means people with low IQs will be able to do high IQ work.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#59

Post by kenjackson »

Pannoniae wrote: post #57
kenjackson wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it converges it’s because that’s what people want.

No, it's what the leading 2 or 3 AI companies want. Do people like the enshittification of the internet? Most likely not, but that's what the platforms want so that's what happens. It's not what the people want, it's whoever runs the AI wants... This is why they should be regulated so they can't have a negatively distorting effect on society with bias and censoring ideas which they don't like.

People love the internet (at least the parts they use). It’s only these side communities that are generally out of touch with normal people (or look down on them) who think that people don’t love the Internet that they use. That said, everyone hates the part of the Internet that don’t use. Like they live their congressperson, but hate everyone else in congress.

Re: Moving AI governance forward – openai.com

#60

Post by kenjackson »

JohnFen wrote: post #28
kenjackson wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turns out that this wouldn't stop others from building it.

I don't see how that's relevant to the point.

Because them stopping to build AI won’t stop AI impacting them. It’s like being afraid of the impact of guns — simply not owning a gun yourself won’t necessarily prevent you from being a victim of gun crime.
Post reply on HN