Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute • Hacker News Board

Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute

#51

Post by az09mugen » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 8:54 PM UTC

andy_xor_andrew wrote: post #31

az09mugen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You write it like there is litteraly 0 risk. Are you aware there are some malicious deviations already possible with AI ? Edit : Totally agree with qualifiedai's edit

> Are you aware there are some malicious deviations already possible with AI ? Alright, you hooked me in. What are they?

For example, some black hats trained LLMs to pentest, so to find more easily vulnerabilities. Those can be used either to improve your defenses or attack entities.

The AIs like Copilot et al are trained on code poorly written with bad security practices (there is a lot more than you think), hence reproducing these bad practices on produced code.

Because also AI are fallible, the spreading of misinformation more than we already have. The retrieval of credentials with prompt hacking, because people push their credentials.

Because they are generated by AI, the misuse of deepfakes, for example a spanish girl was blackmailed with alleged naked pictures of her, but could be used for far worse.

And I did not scratch the copyright/artistic side of AI.

It's not the AI per se the risk, but what people can do with it. Everything is not beautiful. But there are also good things with AI, I agree.

I think there is the need for some form of regulation in a way or another, the sooner the better. I don't expect the regulation to restrain creativity, but to help prevent bad stuff happening.

Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute

#52

Post by jjk166 » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 8:54 PM UTC

lordleft wrote: post #12

Alarming how many people think that the development of AI should have…no government oversight? Are none of you familiar with history?

Why, exactly, should it have government oversight? The overwhelming majority of research, especially in computer science, has no government oversight.

Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute

#53

Post by barryrandall » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 8:55 PM UTC

paganel wrote: post #32

For those in the know, is this a bipartisan position? Any chance of seeing rules like this one "over-ruled" (don't know the exact technical term) in case of different politicians coming to power in the US?

It's executive action, and can be changed on a whim (provided appropriate processes are followed).

Legislative action would theoretically be best, but our current congress couldn't produce a better bill than a wet speak and spell.

Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute

#54

Post by tap-snap-or-nap » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 8:58 PM UTC

I believe this could possibly be about denial of technological advantages for their competitors and potential threats to their control of the markets.

Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute

#55

Post by mistrial9 » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 9:00 PM UTC

sp527 wrote: post #13

qualifiedai wrote: post #2

Let's shoot US innovation and leadership in the foot by establishing random limits on foundation model research. According to EO's guidelines on commpute, something like GPT4 probably falls under reporting guidelines. Also, in the last 10 years GPU compute capabilities grew 1000x. What will be happening even 2 or 5 years from now? Edit: yes, regulations are necessary but we should regulate applications of AI, not fun…

[flagged]

yes and - the FoundationModel approach encases un-duplicatable master-models as central providers with faucets -- perfect fit for technocracy fueled with cash looking for a return.

Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute

#56

Post by NotSammyHagar » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 9:01 PM UTC

tap-snap-or-nap wrote: post #54

I believe this could possibly be about denial of technological advantages for their competitors and potential threats to their control of the markets.

Often such practices are about that. I already got mine, block the next company. But there’s also a certain potential danger. Lower end book cover artists lost their jobs this year with the various picture creator software coming out. What job category is next? It will happen. I expect my job as a software engineer to require more and more use of “programmer aids” which are just llm code writer tools. If I don’t learn how to use them, I’ll be less effective as a programmer, at some point I’d be less employable.

Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute

#57

Post by kanzure » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 9:01 PM UTC

ethanbond wrote: post #46

rockemsockem wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not what is being discussed. Those things are already very illegal and we don't need new and novel ways to address them.

That's exactly what's being discussed? A dramatic reduction in cost and increase in effectiveness of some undesirable behavior is exactly when you should look for new ways to address it. The goal of making things illegal is to prevent their occurrence, and if they get suddenly much cheaper and more effective, then your prior methods of deterring them will no longer work.

> The goal of making things illegal is to prevent their occurrence.

Making drugs illegal didn't stop people from using drugs. Only a person can stop themselves from doing something, that's not something a law does.

Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute

#58

Post by jjk166 » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 9:03 PM UTC

swatcoder wrote: post #38

qualifiedai wrote: post #2

Let's shoot US innovation and leadership in the foot by establishing random limits on foundation model research. According to EO's guidelines on commpute, something like GPT4 probably falls under reporting guidelines. Also, in the last 10 years GPU compute capabilities grew 1000x. What will be happening even 2 or 5 years from now? Edit: yes, regulations are necessary but we should regulate applications of AI, not fun…

Mature corporations need liability protection in order to operate. As "AI" tools become widespread, they're going to want and then require assurance that liability for using those tools falls on somebody else. A healthy regulatory body provides for that by setting standards and holding the relatively few vendors liable for conformance rather than the countless users. It does interfere with innovation for those vendor…

I don't want the companies recklessly operating AIs protected. The capabilities of AI aren't dangerous, only their applications, and those who want to commercialize AI should have to demonstrate that they are using them responsibly. If they're not ready to do that yet, then the field is not mature enough yet to warrant fostering commercialization.

Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute

#59

Post by petre » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 9:03 PM UTC

gustavus wrote: post #9

vsareto wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better than companies doing their own thing and not having any restrictions or oversight at all. Remember that those companies will get rid of some portion of their workers as soon as they think an AI can do most of that work. Heck, they did layoffs and started hiring again without any advancements. You can't trust companies to self-regulate.

I'm sure China and Russia and Iran and all those other nations will 100% see the value of artificially restricting their AI efforts as well because of the risk of harm, and be socially responsible global citizens, that won't exploit this edge for thier own geopolitical agenda.

If you think the US is going to restrict its AI efforts, you are mistaken. This is just a big tech lobbying circus. They'll happily sell Uncle Sam robotic dogs with RPGs and targeting computers, autonomous drone swarms and other AI enabed hardware to deploy across all operations theatres.

The Chinese are busy studying “Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era", the Russians are busy getting wasted in Ukraine and the Iranians are busy checking if women are properly wearing their hijabs and smuggling weapons into Gaza.

Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute

#60

Post by az09mugen » Wed, Nov 01, 2023, 9:04 PM UTC

qualifiedai wrote: post #24

az09mugen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You write it like there is litteraly 0 risk. Are you aware there are some malicious deviations already possible with AI ? Edit : Totally agree with qualifiedai's edit

The risk of AI, is much smaller than the risk of computer graphics or social media. My point is that applications of AI must be regulated, not fundamental research.

I totally agree with your second point.