Live data from Hacker News

Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

theverge.com

71–80 of 409 posts

Re: Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

#71
post #57

How convenient! Turns out they don’t give the slightest damn about “Responsible AI” in the first place. It’s nice to roll out news like this while everyone else is distracted.

Meta is probably the most ethical company in AI at the moment. Most importantly, their models are open source.

You contradict yourself

Re: Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

#72
post #68
post #58

I really really hate what we did to LLMs. We throttled it so much that it's not as useful as it used to be. I think everybody understands that the LLMs lie some % of the time, it's just dumb to censor them. Good move on Meta.

Honestly after what happened with the OpenAI board, it's kind of hard to take the AI safety people seriously. I think there are real problems with Gen AI systems including data privacy, copyright, the potential for convincing misinformation/propaganda, etc, but I'm really not convinced a text generator is an existential threat to the species. We need to take these problems seriously and some of the AI safety discussi…

> I'm really not convinced a text generator is an existential threat to the species.

Well said - there's been too much "Skynet going rogue" sci-fi nonsense injected into this debate.

Re: Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

#73
post #58

I really really hate what we did to LLMs. We throttled it so much that it's not as useful as it used to be. I think everybody understands that the LLMs lie some % of the time, it's just dumb to censor them. Good move on Meta.

What useful thing could the AI do that it can't do any longer?

Give actual results rather than endlessly wasting tokens on useless apologies that it's only an AI.

Re: Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I publish a massive quantity of source code — to the point that it’s very expensive to compile — it’s still open source. If the training data and model training code is available then it should be considered open, even if it’s hard to train.

> the training data This will never be fully open

Maybe not for some closed models. That doesn’t mean truly open models can’t exist.

Re: Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

#75
post #68
post #58

I really really hate what we did to LLMs. We throttled it so much that it's not as useful as it used to be. I think everybody understands that the LLMs lie some % of the time, it's just dumb to censor them. Good move on Meta.

Honestly after what happened with the OpenAI board, it's kind of hard to take the AI safety people seriously. I think there are real problems with Gen AI systems including data privacy, copyright, the potential for convincing misinformation/propaganda, etc, but I'm really not convinced a text generator is an existential threat to the species. We need to take these problems seriously and some of the AI safety discussi…

You’re thinking short term, applying safety to todays LLMs. No one is claiming todays tech poses and existential threat.

Others are looking at the trajectory and thinking about the future, where safety does start to become important.

Re: Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

#76
AI is a tool, and there's about as much point as having some team fretting about responsible usage as there is having similar notions in a Bazooka manufacturer. Whoever ultimately owns the AI (or the Bazooka) will always dictate how and where the particular tool is used.

Many of these AI Ethics foundations (e.g., DAIR), just seem to advocate rent seeking behavior, scraping out a role for themselves off the backs of others who do the actual technical (and indeed ethical) work. I'm sure the Meta Responsible AI team was staffed with similar semi-literate blowhards, all stance and no actual work.

Re: Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

#77

I honestly believe the best to make AI responsibly is to make it open source. That way no single entity has total control over it, and researchers can study them to better understand how they can be used nefariously as well as in a good way—doing that allows us to build defenses to minimize the risks, and reap the benefits. Meta is already doing that, but other companies and organizations should do that as well.

I'm not a doomer but I honestly don't understand this argument. If releasing model as open source helps researchers determine if it's safe, what about when it's not deemed safe? Then it's already out there, on the hard drives of half of 4chan. It's much easier and cheaper to fine-tune a model, distil and quantize it and put it on a killer drone, than it is to train it from scratch.

On the other hand I totally relate with the idea that it could be preferable that everyday has access to advanced AI and not just large companies and nation states.

Re: Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

#78
post #58

I really really hate what we did to LLMs. We throttled it so much that it's not as useful as it used to be. I think everybody understands that the LLMs lie some % of the time, it's just dumb to censor them. Good move on Meta.

What useful thing could the AI do that it can't do any longer?

ChatGPT has gotten noticeably worse at following directions, eg guidelines for writing an essay.

You used to be able to tell it to not include parts of the prompt or write in a certain style — and now it’ll ignore those guidelines.

I believe they did this to stop DAN jailbreaks, but now, it can no longer follow directions for composition at all.

Re: Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

#79
post #68
post #58

I really really hate what we did to LLMs. We throttled it so much that it's not as useful as it used to be. I think everybody understands that the LLMs lie some % of the time, it's just dumb to censor them. Good move on Meta.

Honestly after what happened with the OpenAI board, it's kind of hard to take the AI safety people seriously. I think there are real problems with Gen AI systems including data privacy, copyright, the potential for convincing misinformation/propaganda, etc, but I'm really not convinced a text generator is an existential threat to the species. We need to take these problems seriously and some of the AI safety discussi…

"'m really not convinced a text generator is an existential threat to the species"

Except it's not only a text generator. It now browses the web, runs code and calls functions.

Re: Meta disbanded its Responsible AI team

#80
post #75
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly after what happened with the OpenAI board, it's kind of hard to take the AI safety people seriously. I think there are real problems with Gen AI systems including data privacy, copyright, the potential for convincing misinformation/propaganda, etc, but I'm really not convinced a text generator is an existential threat to the species. We need to take these problems seriously and some of the AI safety discussi…

You’re thinking short term, applying safety to todays LLMs. No one is claiming todays tech poses and existential threat. Others are looking at the trajectory and thinking about the future, where safety does start to become important.

All large scale human atrocities required a centralized government imposing on the public a technocratic agenda.

“AI safety” advocates are recreating that problem, now with AI spice.

How about we don’t create actual problems (technocrats imposing disasters on the public) because we’re fighting the scourge of hypothetical pixies?

Post reply on HN