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

PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

jamestown.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 127 posts

Re: PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

#61

Post by lawlessone »

fragmede wrote: post #58
lawlessone wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He is probably referring to that exact thing. Anthropic does a lot of these contrived "studies" though that seem to be marketing AI capabilities.

What would make it less contrived to you? Giving my assistant, human or AI, access to my email, seems necessary for them to do their job.

>What would make it less contrived to you?

No creating a contrived situation where the it's the models only path?

https://www.anthropic.com/research/agentic-misalignment

"We deliberately created scenarios that presented models with no other way to achieve their goals"

You can make most people steal if you if you leave them no choice.

>Giving my assistant, human or AI, access to my email, seems necessary for them to do their job.

Um ok? never felt the need for an assistant myself but i guess you could do that if you wanted to.

Re: PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

#62

Post by intalentive »

>Chinese elites have warned of AI-induced labor displacement that could exacerbate challenges related to unemployment and inequality. Nie Huihua (聂辉华), deputy dean of the National Academy of Development and Strategy at Renmin University, has stated that AI adoption benefits business owners, not workers

Ruling elites that consider the interests of the majority? Novel idea.

Re: PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

#63

Post by paxys »

janalsncm wrote: post #52

There was an interesting bit about the relationship between industry and academia (translated from a link in the OP): > Currently, some universities are cultivating engineering talent; it would be very necessary and beneficial to have people with industry experience come to teach them. However, under our current system, these teachers from enterprises may not even have the opportunity to teach classes, because teachi…

Is there any system where "people with industry experience come to teach [students]" actually happens? From what I've seen (in the USA and similar places) contribution of industry veterans extends mostly to guest lectures, which is a very rare happening and the purpose is motivation and recruiting rather than education. Industry and academia are universally two very distinct paths, and the split happens very early on in one's life. I personally haven't seen the former significantly contributing to the latter. The reverse, interestingly, is a lot more prevalent.

Re: PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

#64

Post by intalentive »

XenophileJKO wrote: post #33
andy_xor_andrew wrote: post #18

> former Dean of Electronics Engineering and Computer Science at Peking University, has noted that Chinese data makes up only 1.3 percent of global large-model datasets (The Paper, March 24). Reflecting these concerns, the Ministry of State Security (MSS) has issued a stark warning that “poisoned data” (数据投毒) could “mislead public opinion” (误导社会舆论) (Sina Finance, August 5). from a technical point of view, I suppose i…

I was thinking about this yesterday. My personal opinion is that the PRC will face a self created headwind that likely, structurally, will prevent them from leading in AI. As the model get's more powerful, you can't simply train the model on your narrative if it doesn't align with real data/world. At some capacity, the model will notice and then it becomes a can of worms. This means they need to train the model to be…

>As the model get's more powerful, you can't simply train the model on your narrative if it doesn't align with real data/world.

That’s what “AI alignment” is. Doesn’t seem to be hurting Western models.

Re: PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

#65

Post by narrator »

XenophileJKO wrote: post #33
andy_xor_andrew wrote: post #18

> former Dean of Electronics Engineering and Computer Science at Peking University, has noted that Chinese data makes up only 1.3 percent of global large-model datasets (The Paper, March 24). Reflecting these concerns, the Ministry of State Security (MSS) has issued a stark warning that “poisoned data” (数据投毒) could “mislead public opinion” (误导社会舆论) (Sina Finance, August 5). from a technical point of view, I suppose i…

I was thinking about this yesterday. My personal opinion is that the PRC will face a self created headwind that likely, structurally, will prevent them from leading in AI. As the model get's more powerful, you can't simply train the model on your narrative if it doesn't align with real data/world. At some capacity, the model will notice and then it becomes a can of worms. This means they need to train the model to be…

The glitchy stuff in the model reasoning is likely to come from the constant redefinition of words that communists and other ideologues like to engage in. For example "People's Democratic Republic of Korea."

Re: PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

#66

Post by saubeidl »

XenophileJKO wrote: post #33
andy_xor_andrew wrote: post #18

> former Dean of Electronics Engineering and Computer Science at Peking University, has noted that Chinese data makes up only 1.3 percent of global large-model datasets (The Paper, March 24). Reflecting these concerns, the Ministry of State Security (MSS) has issued a stark warning that “poisoned data” (数据投毒) could “mislead public opinion” (误导社会舆论) (Sina Finance, August 5). from a technical point of view, I suppose i…

I was thinking about this yesterday. My personal opinion is that the PRC will face a self created headwind that likely, structurally, will prevent them from leading in AI. As the model get's more powerful, you can't simply train the model on your narrative if it doesn't align with real data/world. At some capacity, the model will notice and then it becomes a can of worms. This means they need to train the model to be…

That is assuming the capitalist narrative preferred by US leadership is non-ideological.

I suspect both are bias factors.

Re: PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

#67

Post by GoatInGrey »

graemep wrote: post #22
fragmede wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI Threatens the Workforce Under communism, why is this a thing? I know that China hasn't been strictly communist since the Soviets fell but ostensibly, humanoid AI robots under semi-communism is a the dream, no?

Is China communist? There has been a huge amount of privatisation. There are literally hundreds of billionaires. The state still owns some critical things, but is that enough to make it communist? Its not everything and you can have state ownership and still have a ruling class that has control of the means of production which it uses to its own advantage.

The PRC asserts that they follow a modified Marxism-Leninism. Though the ideology is full of hypocrisies and plain old nonsense. For instance, they refer to themselves as a "people's democratic dictatorship" that is "led by the working class". This irrationality extends into their stated foreign policy approach of "peaceful rise" & respecting sovereignty, a "socialist market economy" in which independent labor unions are illegal & violently suppressed, and anything else you can think of.

They're basically totalitarian gaslighters. See how hysterical the PRC gets whenever any nation indicates that they will protect Taiwan from violent invasion. You can see an obsession with narrative control that borders on pathological.

Re: PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

#68

Post by bloppe »

Terr_ wrote: post #59
JohnKemeny wrote: post #24

Is "PRC" a common abbreviation? Does it mean "China", or does it mean something else? Why not write China? I'm from KOS* (neighbor country of KON* and ROF*), so I don't know much. * Kingdom of Sweden , Kingdom of Norway , Republic of Finland .

Others answered the main reason, but sometimes I find myself using "PRC" to indicate a particular government (~1950-Present) which unlike "China" excludes past dynasties, and is less-likely to be interpreted as referring to the people or culture. For example, the potential differences between: "France has always been X." "The French republic has always been X." "The French monarchy has always been X."

Which republic lol we're on #5

Re: PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

#69

Post by stickfigure »

All of this handwringing is so strange.

Right now, as we speak, there are giant teams of people doing their best to build AI-powered killer robots. They mostly come in the shape of flying suicide drones. Dumb versions currently kill hundreds to thousands of people per day in Ukraine. There's an arms race to automate them so they can work without an interruptible human remote control.

In this context, worrying about AI alignment, social impact, or effectiveness seems positively quaint. We're literally teaching them to kill.

Human vs robot warfare is not going to turn out well for the humans.

Re: PRC elites voice AI-skepticism

#70

Post by Terr_ »

bloppe wrote: post #68
Terr_ wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Others answered the main reason, but sometimes I find myself using "PRC" to indicate a particular government (~1950-Present) which unlike "China" excludes past dynasties, and is less-likely to be interpreted as referring to the people or culture. For example, the potential differences between: "France has always been X." "The French republic has always been X." "The French monarchy has always been X."

Which republic lol we're on #5

I don't critique France['s governments] enough to know the right way of identifying them all, but I trust the underlying problem has been adequately demonstrated. :p
Post reply on HN