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

Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#671

Post by EamonnMR »

robwwilliams wrote: post #666
pg_1234 wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is also growing speculation that the current level of AI may have peaked in a bang for buck sense. If this is so, and given the concrete examples of cheap derived models learning from the first movers and rapidly (and did I mention cheaply) closing the gap to this peak, the optimal self-serving corporate play is to invite regulation. After the legislative moats go up, it is once again about who has the biggest…

Counterpoint—-there is growing speculation we are just about to transition to AGI.

Growing? Or have the same voices who have been saying it since the aughts suddenly been platformed.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#672

Post by simonh »

happytiger wrote: post #622
anileated wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> open source "core inspectable" AIs that millions of people can examine and tear apart, including and ESPECIALLY the training data and processes that create them. True open source AI also strikes me as prerequisite for fair use of original works in training data. I hope Congress asks ClosedAI to explain what’s up with all that profiting off copyrighted material first before even considering the answer.

Absolutely. It's going to absolutely shred the trademark and copyright systems, if they even apply (or are extended to apply) which is a murky area right now. And even then, the sheer volume of material created by a geometric improvement and subsequent cost destruction of virtually every intellectual and artistic endeavor or product means that even if you hold the copyright or trademark, good luck paying for enforcem…

> What people also fail to understand is that AI is largely seen by the military industrial complex as a weapon to control culture and influence.

Could you share the minutes from the Military Industrial Complex strategy meetings this was discussed at. Thanks.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#673

Post by anticensor »

jacquesm wrote: post #562

Regulatory capture in progress. I used to have a bit of respect of Altman have spent time, bits and processing cycles here defending him in the past. As of now that respect has all but evaporated, this is a very bad stance. Either nobody gets to play with the new toys or everybody gets to play. What's next, classifying AI as munitions?

That would be equivalent to requiring secret laws, as AI can also act as a decision system.

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#677

Post by precompute »

dahwolf wrote: post #635
precompute wrote: post #615

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. No page on OpenAI's website about the thousands of underpaid third-world workers that sit and label the data. They will try and build momentum and avoid the "uncomfortable" questions at all costs.

I empathize with that issue, especially the underpaid part, but superficially that work is still a type of value exchange based on consent: you do the labeling, you get paid (poorly). Yet for the issue I discussed, there's no value exchange at all. There's no permission or compensation for the people that have done the actual work of producing the training material.

Oh yeah. And labeling it as an "AI" further obfuscates it. But apart from small gestures catered to people whose work is very "unique" / identifiable, no one else will get a kickback. They only need to kick the ball further for a couple more years and then it'll become a non-issue as linkrot takes over. Or maybe they use non-public domain stuff, maybe they have secret deals with publishers.

Heck, sometimes even google doesn't pay people for introducing new languages to their translation thingy.

https://restofworld.org/2023/google-translate-sorani-kurdish...

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#678

Post by Mistletoe »

m00x wrote: post #387
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Reminds me of SBF calling for crypto regulations while running FTX Scott Galloway called it the stop-me-before-I-kill-grandma defence. (Paraphrasing.) You made money making a thing. You continue to make the thing. You’re telling us how the thing will bring doom and gloom if not dealt with (conveniently implying it will change the world). And you want to staff the regulatory body you call for with the very butchers…

Except they don't make any money from their products. They're losing hundreds of millions per month. This isn't the same at all.

It may be more the same than you know. FTX had tons of investors in it that was jumpstarting and fueling the whole ponzi...

>According to a report from the Information, OpenAI's losses have doubled to $540 million since it started developing ChatGPT and similar products.

I mean sure that may be a drop in the bucket compared to the 29B valuation for Open AI, but-

>Sept. 22, 2022

>Crypto Exchange FTX May Get a $32 Billion Valuation. That’s Probably Too Much.

OpenAI investors, Apr 2023-

Tiger Global Management Andreessen Horowitz Thrive Capital Sequoia Capital K2 Global

FTX investors, Jan 2022-

Insight Partners Lightspeed Venture Partners Tiger Global Management New Enterprise Associates Temasek Institutional Venture Partners Steadview Capital SoftBank Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan Paradigm

Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI

#680

Post by brookst »

nonethewiser wrote: post #555
happytiger wrote: post #497

We need to MAKE SURE that AI as a technology ISN'T controlled by a small number of powerful corporations with connections to governments. To expound, this just seems like a power grab to me, to "lock in" the lead and keep AI controlled by a small number of corporations that can afford to license and operate the technologies. Obviously, this will create a critical nexus of control for a small number of well connected…

This is the definition of regulatory capture. Altman should be invited to speak so that we understand the ideas in his head but anything he suggests should be categorically rejected because he’s just not in a position to be trusted. If what he suggests are good ideas then hopefully we can arrive at them in some other way with a clean chain of custody. Although I assume if he’s speaking on AI they actually intend on c…

I'm not following this "good ideas must come from an ideologically pure source" thing.

Shouldn't we be evaluating ideas on the merits and not categorically rejecting (or endorsing) them based on who said them?

Post reply on HN