Cool. Great job guys. Now do one for CONSUMER DATA PROTECTION, RIGHTS AND PRIVACY. I WILL EVEN LET YOU COME UP WITH A FUNNY LITTLE 3 LETTER AGENCY NAME FOR IT. I DO NOT CARE.
Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute
61–70 of 91 posts
Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute
#62Let'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]
> we're in the final stages of capitalism
This is wrong in the sense that modern mixed economies are already post-capitalist if you take a narrow view of capitalism, and also almost certainly wrong if you take the broader view of capitalism which encompasses the modern mixed economy (say, any system featuring private ownership of the means of production even if the practical exercise of control of owners is constrained by democratically constituted public authority enforcing some views of the common interest.)
“Late-stage capitalism” wishcasting may be the most annoying current form of secular millenarian eschatology.
Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute
#63"Despite the increasing complexity and capabilities of machine learning models, they still lack what is commonly understood as "agency." They don't have desires, intentions, or the ability to form goals. They operate under a fixed set of rules or algorithms and don't "want" anything. Even in feedback loop systems where a model might "learn" from the outcomes of its actions, this learning is typically constrained by t…
Is there a point buried in all that? You seem to be implying that there shouldn't be any regulatory body to address self-improving AI until it already exists? I don't think the government moves quickly enough for that to be okay.
No, we/they should be focusing on other actual things that are happening here and now. Not science fiction.
Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> we're in the final stages of capitalism This is wrong in the sense that modern mixed economies are already post-capitalist if you take a narrow view of capitalism, and also almost certainly wrong if you take the broader view of capitalism which encompasses the modern mixed economy (say, any system featuring private ownership of the means of production even if the practical exercise of control of owners is constrain…
You're right. I should have said: "we're in the final stages of any semblance of socioeconomic mobility within a free market system".
> “Late-stage capitalism” wishcasting may be the most annoying current form of secular millenarian eschatology.
This is a luxury belief one can adopt nearer to the apex of the pyramid and when not amongst the literally billions of people being crushed at the bottom. You should try putting in 60+ hours of blue collar labor across 3 different jobs just to end up paycheck to paycheck in the slummiest part of a major US city. And that would still be miles better than where most people are at in the rest of the world.
Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute
#65Most of us care if the drugs we're taking are properly tested and won't have adverse side effects or at least that the adverse side effects are known so the risk/reward may be calculated. Most of us care if the cars we drive are safe for us and don't have any hidden flaws that may fatally emerge. Same goes for food and drinks I assume. Actually, it's probably easier to find areas with beneficial regulations than functionally no regulations at all. Why is it that in this case people are willing to abandon caution and just dive in without looking ?
Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute
#66I'm unsure what limits will do. Selling weapons and explosives is regulated, but it doesn't stop the government from doing it. So by limiting it, we're only limiting the people?
[deleted]
Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute
#67Earlier 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
You need to argue two things: 1. There are risks specific to AI or specifically aggravated by AI (easy) 2. Federal regulation of AI safety will reduce those risks (good luck) When articulating your arguments for point 2, I would recommend addressing the thorny issue of proliferation.
It's not my job nor I have the imagination or the knowledge to argue 2.
But don't you agree at least some legal questions should be asked about this overhype of AI ? Because I don't see any so far.
Edit : this is the kind of legal question I was talking about, just learned it now : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38102760
Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I didn't say all laws are 100% effective, or even greater than 0% effective. I stated why we have laws at all. Pretty wild logic you've got here. Let's try this one:
> Making murder illegal didn't stop people from murdering. Only a person can stop themselves from doing something, that's not something a law does.
Should we not have rape, murder, arson, or fraud laws?
Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute
#69Let'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…
Be glad they didn't put it into DOE. It would be NRC 2.0.
Re: Establishment of the U.S. Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute
#70Alarming how many people think that the development of AI should have…no government oversight? Are none of you familiar with history?
I think most disastrous situations (wars, genocides) in humans history was led by governments applying its power.