Any usage of the word "safe" without an accompanying precise definition of it is utter null and void.
[deleted]
Safe Superintelligence Inc.
671–680 of 1001 posts
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#672“””We are assembling a lean, cracked team of the world’s best engineers and researchers dedicated to focusing on SSI and nothing else.””” Cracked indeed
[deleted]
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#673[flagged]
[deleted]
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#674Earlier quoted context omitted.
AlphaGo took us from mediocre engines to outclassing the best human players in the world within a few short years. Ilya contributed to AlphaGo. What makes you so confident this can't happen with token prediction?
If solving chess already created the Singularity, why do we need token prediction? Why do we need computers that are better than humans at the game of token prediction?
Because it can be argued that intelligence is just highly sophisticated token prediction?
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#675Not to be too pessimistic here, but why are we talking about things like this? I get that it’s a fun thing to think about, what we will do when a great artificial superintelligence is achieved and how we deal with it, feels like we’re living in a science fiction book. But, all we’ve achieved at this point is making a glorified token predicting machine trained on existing data (made by humans), not really being able t…
We already have limited "artificial superintelligences". A pocket calculator is better at calculating than the best humans, and we certainly put calculators to good use. What we call AIs are just more generic versions of tools like pocket calculators, or guns.
And that's the key, it is a tool, a tool that will give a lot of power to whoever is controlling it. And that's where safety matters, it should be made so that it helps good guys more than it helps bad guys, and limit accidents. How? I don't know. Maybe people at SSI do. We already know that the 3 laws of robotics won't work, Asimov only made them to write stories about how broken they are :)
Current-gen AIs are already cause for concern. They are shown to be good at bullshitting, something that bad people are already taking advantage of. I don't believe in robot apocalypse, technological singularities, etc... but some degree of control, like we do with weapons is not a bad thing. We are not there yet with AI, but we might be soon.
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#676Lmao
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#677Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because it's likely soon LLMs will be able to teach themselves and surpass humans. No consciousness, no will. But somebody will have their power. Dark government agencies and questionable billionaires. Who knows what will it enable them to do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaGo_Zero
What's the connection between LLMs and AlphaGo?
They both use deep learning and gradient descent. Also both were made possible by availability of GPUs.
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#678Not to be too pessimistic here, but why are we talking about things like this? I get that it’s a fun thing to think about, what we will do when a great artificial superintelligence is achieved and how we deal with it, feels like we’re living in a science fiction book. But, all we’ve achieved at this point is making a glorified token predicting machine trained on existing data (made by humans), not really being able t…
AlphaGo took us from mediocre engines to outclassing the best human players in the world within a few short years. Ilya contributed to AlphaGo. What makes you so confident this can't happen with token prediction?
I'm pretty sure Ilya had nothing to do with AlphaGo, which came from DeepMind. He did work for Google Brain for a few years before OpenAI, but that was before Brain and DeepMind merged. The AlphaGo lead was David Silver.
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#679The site is a good example of Poe's Law. If I didn't know that it was real, I would have thought it was parody. > We are assembling a lean, cracked team of the world’s best engineers and researchers dedicated to focusing on SSI and nothing else. Do you have to have a broken bone to join? Apparently, grammatical nuances are not an area of focus for safety, unless they think that a broken team ("cracked") is an asset i…
Too snarky...anyway, "crack" means "exceptional" in some contexts. I've seen footballers using it a lot over the years (Neymar, Messi etc) fwiw. Just realized - we even say "it's not all its cracked up to be" as a negative statement which would imply "cracked up" is positive.
> I've seen footballers using it a lot over the years (Neymar, Messi etc) fwiw.
The word "craque" in Portuguese was borrowed from English with the "exceptional" definition and is commonly used. Given how many Brazilian players there are in the top leagues, I wouldn't be surprised if it was commonly used by football players in general.
Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.
#680As others have pointed out, it's the business incentives that create unsafe AI, and this doesn't solve that. Social media recommendation algorithms are already incredibly unsafe for society and young people (girls in particular [1]). When negative externalities exist, government should create regulation that appropriately accounts for that cost. I understand there's a bit of a paradigm shift and new attack vectors wi…
> for society and young people (girls in particular [1]). I don't think the article with a single focused example bears that out at all. From the article: > "Even more troubling are the men who signed up for paid subscriptions after the girl launched a program for super-fans receive special photos and other content." > "Her mom conceded that those followers are “probably the scariest ones of all.”" I'm sorry.. but wh…
> I'm sorry.. but what is your daughter selling, exactly?
Did.. did you just post “I’d have to see these images of the preteen girl before I could form an opinion about whether or not the men buying and sharing them were creeps” as a rebuttal to an article about social media enabling child predators?