651–660 of 873 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d say we’re about 5 years out from the Great Firewall of America, and requiring government ID associated with serial number to legally purchase components. America will do that before gun control.
Maybe you need to argue that LLMs are so dangerous effectively weapons, and therefore should be covered by the second amendment? /s
If this becomes the norm, what incentive does the rest of the world have to keep their markets open to the US? If US companies have a large unfair advantage such that domestic competitors are no longer able to compete, then wouldn't it make sense for governments around the world to ban or tariff US products and services? If I was responsible for national economic policy, I would place this at the top of my non-emerge…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US as a large-scale import nation and so does not need the rest of the world (except perhaps Europe, and only small parts) to keep its markets open to the US. Even in the European case, Europe would lose much more than the US would if they closed their markets. Plus, a lot of Europe is either very close to breaking point and unwilling to change (Italy), or rapidly worsening into a crash, and unwilling to change (…
I don't think whether a country is an importer or an exporter matters at this point. This is likely going to develop into a matter of national security. Nations cannot allow most of their domestic industries to be destroyed. If the US doesn't reverse course soon, I think we'll start seeing large-scale closure of international markets to US companies very soon. Even with US retaliation, there is no other option.
It's really sad seeing how little so many of us Europeans understand the situation. America and China hold all the cards, Europe holds none. It makes very little that is both unique and strategic. Decades of left wing economic policies are coming home to roost and there's no way to turn the ship around now.
Next time someone tells you this is the party of free market and small government, I guess you just laugh now?
If you laugh you’re a communist and against Christianity and part of a satanic cabal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So, assuming they are moderately sane is "conspiracy theory"? Every time I've met someone who believes a conspiracy theory, they don't realise how not-sane the conspiracy they propose is.* Founding a company on the basis you don't think the others are safe enough, raising capital on that basis, developing methods to improve AI safety, publishing literature about your methods, making open calls for legislation for s…
They raised money on the basis of replacing labor by cheaper AI. Not on the basis of being more safe then nebulous "others". They are not "safe" and do nothing to make world safer or better. > Founding a company on the basis you don't think the others are safe enough, raising capital on that basis, developing methods to improve AI safety, publishing literature about your methods, making open calls for legislation for…
Original founding says otherwise, for both OpenAI (famously) and Anthropic with this in a copy of their certificate of incorporation I found:
ARTICLE III
The specific public benefit that the Corporation will promote is to responsibly develop and maintain advanced Al for the cultural, social and technological improvement of humanity. In addition, the Corporation may engage in any lawful act or activity for which corporations may be organized under the Delaware General Corporation Law as the same exists or may hereafter be amended (the "DGCL.").
Immediate thing they did? Spend one year training a model, then a second year safety-testing it.
> These are marketing claims. Or self-delusion claims.
It's published reproducible work. Early-stage stuff you could get away with calling "self-delusion", that doesn't fly when papers get published, sometimes on topics that can be described as "AI do X, which is bad, can we make them not?" e.g https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.13548, https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.10162, https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.10965, https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.18397 from Anthropic and https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.16339 from OpenAI.
> Continuing to maintain self-aggrandizing position that makes investors give you money is not proof that you are genuine.
Conspiracies and growing businesses are incompatible with not getting caught.
A conspiracy of 2 is easy to hide. How big did Facebook get before we saw their dirty laundry?
> I just dont see how "they are really trying to cause maximal harm to maximum amount of people" is a defense.
With that in quotations, you seem to be arguing backwards from what you think they're doing.
Their actual arguments are much the same as open source software: with enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.
This is obviously true. It may not be sufficient, there's plenty of other doomers who say it isn't sufficient, but it is true.
Easy way to demonstrate, is the difference with the armchair philosophising before LLMs vs. what we see now they exist:
We had decades of people claiming the "obvious" way to keep superhuman intelligence safe is to keep it in a box, keep it offline. Every one of those discussions I've been in, the person saying this refused to believe that it was possible for an AI to convince humans to let it out of the box.
Real life? Blake Lemoine violates his NDA and hires a lawyer on behalf of an LLM, after the LLM convinced him with arguments that a lot of other people (justifiably) mocked him for believing. LaMDA was not superhuman, and it still convinced him.
Did this immediately stop people saying we can keep AI in a box and just not let it out? Nope, kept hearing that for another year or two. That's how much experience humanity collectively needed to internalise just that one part of "AI is more dangerous than you think it is".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might not be a coincidence that POTUS wrote yesterday on Truth Social that 100% tariffs would be imposed on any country proceeding with taxing US' digital services.
Empty threat conditional on something that will never happen. Most of the rest of the world is too heavily dependent on US digital services to tax them more heavily. From social media to hyperscaler's clouds the US is dominant and stuff will just stop working if they get taxed. There would be a huge pushback from businesses if their government increased the cost of things like AWS. Edit: edit to say tax more heavily
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, that study shows safety of the vaccine, so what’s your point? Could you actually just say what’s your point? I can’t tell you why you are wrong if you don’t tell me what’s your problem.
27% had a bad reaction to the treatment. Name another vaccine (pre COVID definition) that has a similar statistical outcome. Pre-COVID routine vaccines have a 1/500,000 or less negative rate. Hell, even 1/10,000 would be reasonable in an emergency (should be optional at that rate though). 1/3 is not okay. That's far worse than the disease it's supposed to treat. You need to have horns and a tail to call 1/3 safe. The…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is far from a new challenge though. Another recent example, China has an advantage on cost of labor and manufacturing, and lack of enforcement of IP rights. They can produce for much cheaper than many other countries but it hasn't led to everyone banning trade with them.
What part of China has cheap qualified labor? Skilled engineers nowadays demand between southern and central European prices at the very least.
They def make less than in europe. You make very good money for working at Volkswagen on the line.
And China now also has software developers and even if they make the same amount, they are def also now a big player in the game and take parts of the cake.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it apply to USA citizens and organizations as well?
Fun fact the 1996 cryptography restrictions have never been repealed. You just haven't heard of them as open source software has broadly been exempted https://www.linuxfoundation.org/resources/publications/under...
Then you've had lots of fun with EAR compliance.