721–730 of 1001 posts
Holy shit. Ignore the silly third party plugins, the first party plugins for web browsing and code interpretation are massive game changers. Up to date information and performing original research on it is huge. As someone else said, Google is dead unless they massively shift in the next 6 months. No longer do I need to sift through pages of "12 best recipes for Thanksgiving" blog spam - OpenAI will do this for me an…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have a ton of protection laws around all sorts of dangerous technology, this is a super naive take. You can't buy tons of weapon technology, nuclear materials, aerosolized compounds, pesticides. These are all highly regulated and illegal pieces of technology for the better . In general the liberal position of progress = good is wrong in many cases, and I'll be thankful to see AI get neutered. If anything treat it…
> You can't buy tons of weapon technology, nuclear materials, aerosolized compounds, pesticides. These are all highly regulated and illegal pieces of technology for the better. All those examples put us in physical danger to the point of death.
See airlines, traffic control, medical equipment, government services, but also we regulate ads, TV, financial services, crypto. I mean we regulate so many “tech” things for the benefit of society this is a losing argument to take. There’s plenty of room to argue the elsewhere but the idea that we don’t regulate tech if it’s not immediately a physical danger is crazy. Even global warming is a huge one, down to housing codes and cars etc. It’s a potential physical danger hundreds of years out, and we’re freaking out about it. Yet AI had the chance to really do much more damage within a much shorter time frame.
We also just regulate soft social stability things all over, be it nudity, noise, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's exciting and cool, but don't quit your job based on an emotional decision I'm just skeptical on how OpenAI fixes the blog spam issue you mentioned. Im sure someone has already started doing the math on how to game these systems and ensure that when you ask ChatGPT for recipe recs, it's going to spout the same spam (maybe worded a bit differently) and we'll soon all get tired of it again. Everything's changing, b…
Definitely not an emotional decision. I strongly believe we're going to see a massive shift for rational reasons :) OpenAI fixes this issue by not giving you two pages of the history of this recipe and the grandmother that originated it and what the author's thoughts are about the weather. It's just the recipe. No ads. No referral links. No slideshows. You don't have to click through three useless websites to find on…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress? Every time an IRB, ERB, IEC, or REB says no. Do you want an exact date and time? I'm sure it happens multiple times a day even.
> Do you want an exact date and time? I'm sure it happens multiple times a day even. You should read "when in human history" in larger time scales than minutes, hours, and days. Furthermore, you should read it not as binary (no progress or all progress), but the general arc is technological progress ion .
It would really help for you to just say what timescale you're setting as your standard. I'm getting real, "My cutoff is actually 51 years"-energy.
Just accept that we have, as a society, decided not to pursue some knowledge because of the ethics. It's pretty simple.
Holy shit. Ignore the silly third party plugins, the first party plugins for web browsing and code interpretation are massive game changers. Up to date information and performing original research on it is huge. As someone else said, Google is dead unless they massively shift in the next 6 months. No longer do I need to sift through pages of "12 best recipes for Thanksgiving" blog spam - OpenAI will do this for me an…
Where the hell do we even go from here? The logical step seems to be to start studying AI now but even Sam Altman has said that he’s thinking that ML engineers will be the first to get automated. Can’t find source but I think it was one of his interviews on YouTube before chatgpt came out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This has nothing to do with ChatGPT. An api end point will be just as vulnerable if it's called from any application. There's nothing special about an LLM interface that will make this more or less likely. It sounds like you're weaving science fiction ideas about AGI into your comment. There's no safety issue here unless you think that ChatGPT will use api access to pursue its own goals and intentions.
I'm sure that with the right prompting, you can get it to very convincingly participate as a party in a contract negotiation or business haggling of some sort. It would be indistinguishable from an agent with its own goals and intentions. The thing about "it has no goals and intents" is that it is contradictory with its purpose of successfully passing off as us: beings with goals and intents. If you fake it well enou…
The thing about "it has no goals and intents" is that it's not true. It has them - you just don't know what they are.
Remember the Koan?
In the days when Sussman was a novice, Minsky once came to him
as he sat hacking at the PDP-6.
"What are you doing?", asked Minsky.
"I am training a randomly wired neural net to play Tic-tac-toe", Sussman replied.
"Why is the net wired randomly?", asked Minsky.
"I do not want it to have any preconceptions of how to play", Sussman said.
Minsky then shut his eyes.
"Why do you close your eyes?" Sussman asked his teacher.
"So that the room will be empty."
At that moment, Sussman was enlightened.Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pshhh... I think it's awesome. The faster we build the future, the better. What annoys me is this is just further evidence that their "AI Safety" is nothing but lip-service, when they're clearly moving fast and breaking things. Just the other day they had a bug where you could see the chat history of other users! (Which, btw, they're now claiming in a modal on login was due to a "bug in an open source library" - anyo…
> The faster we build the future, the better. Why? Getting to "the future" isn't a goal in and of itself. It's just a different state with a different set of problems, some of which we've proven that we're not prepared to anticipate or respond to before they cause serious harm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When in human history have we ever intentionally not furthered technological progress? It's simply an unrealistic proposition, especially when the costs of doing it are so low that anyone with sufficient GPU power and knowledge of the latest research can get pretty close to the cutting edge. So the best we can hope for is that someone ethical is the first to advance that technological progress. I hope you wouldn't ad…
We have a ton of protection laws around all sorts of dangerous technology, this is a super naive take. You can't buy tons of weapon technology, nuclear materials, aerosolized compounds, pesticides. These are all highly regulated and illegal pieces of technology for the better . In general the liberal position of progress = good is wrong in many cases, and I'll be thankful to see AI get neutered. If anything treat it…
As technology advances, such prohibitions are going to become less and less effective.
Tech is constantly getting smaller, cheaper and easier for a random person or group of people to acquire, no matter what the laws say.
Add in the nearly infinite profit and power motive to get hold of strong AI and it'll almost impossible to stop, as governments, billionaires, and megacorps all over the world will see it as a massive competitive disadvantage not to have one.
Make laws against it in one place, your competitor in another part of the world without such laws or their effective enforcement will dominate you before long.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. I think the point is that a properly constructed prompt will do that at some point, lowering the barrier of entry for such attacks.
Oh - I see. But then again, all those technologies themselves lowered the barriers of entry for attacks, and I guess yeah people do use them for fraudulent purposes quite extensively - I’m struggling a bit to see why this is special though.
I guess the mundane aspect of "specialness" is just that, before, you'd have to explicitly code a program to do weird stuff with APIs, which is a task complex enough that nobody really bothered. Now, LLMs seem on the verge of being able to self-program.
I have some odd feelings about this. It took less than a year to go from "of course it isn't hooked up to the internet in any way, silly!" to "ok.... so we hooked up up to the internet..." First is your API calls, then your chatgpt-jailbreak-turns-into-a-bank-DDOS-attack, then your "today it somehow executed several hundred thousand threads of a python script that made perfectly timed trades at 8:31AM on the NYSE whi…
Has anyone tried handing loaded guns to a chimpanzee? Feels like under explored research