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

Safe Superintelligence Inc.

ssi.inc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

801–810 of 1001 posts

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#801

Post by throwaway4good »

botanical wrote: post #766
throwaway4good wrote: post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a strange thing. We are not anywhere near “super intelligence” yet the priority is safety. If the Wright brothers had focused on safety, I am not sure they would have flown very far.

The consequences of actual AI is far reaching compared to a plane crash.

No they are not.

Not unless you connect a machine gun to your neural net.

Otherwise - we are talking about a chat bot - yes if there is no safety - it will say something racist - or implement a virus for you that you would have had to search 4chan for or something.

None of this is any more dangerous than what you can find on the far corners of the internet.

And it will not bring the end of the world.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#803

Post by insane_dreamer »

sgregnt wrote: post #794
buckinkb wrote: post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should be less concerned about super intelligence and more about the immediate threat of job loss. An AI doesn’t need to be Skynet to wreak massive havoc on society. Replacing 20% of jobs in a very short period of time could spark global unrest resulting in WW3

The thing is, the replaced 20% people can always revert to having economy i.e., business among themselves, unless of cause they themselves prefer (cheaper) buissiness with AI. But then this just means they are better off in the first place from this change. It is a bit like claiming that third world low productivity countries are suffering because there are countries with much much higher productivity. Well, they can…

Reassuring words for the displaced 20% ...

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#804

Post by insane_dreamer »

sgregnt wrote: post #796
insane_dreamer wrote: post #66

I understand the concern that a "superintelligence" will emerge that will escape its bounds and threaten humanity. That is a risk. My bigger, and more pressing worry, is that a "superintelligence" will emerge that does not escape its bounds, and the question will be which humans control it. Look no further than history to see what happens when humans acquire great power. The "cold war" nuclear arms race, which brough…

How about this possibility: The good guys will be one step ahead, they will have more resources the bad guys will risk imprisonment if they misapply super intelligence. And this will be discovered and protected from by even better super intelligence.

Sounds like a movie plot.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#805

Post by dbish »

jen729w wrote: post #580
Sharlin wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can make a safe AI today, but what happens when the next person is managing things? The point of safe superintelligence , and presumably the goal of SSI Inc., is that there won't be a next (biological) person managing things afterwards. At least none who could do anything to build a competing unsafe SAI. We're not talking about the banal definition of "safety" here. If the first superintelligence has any reason…

I wonder how many people panicking about these things have ever visited a data centre. They have big red buttons at the end of every pod. Shuts everything down. They have bigger red buttons at the end of every power unit. Shuts everything down. And down at the city, there’s a big red button at the biggest power unit. Shuts everything down. Having arms and legs is going to be a significant benefit for some time yet. I…

This is why I think it’s more important we give AI agents the ability to use human surrogates. Arms and legs win but can be controlled with the right incentives

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#806

Post by insane_dreamer »

beardedwizard wrote: post #783
throwawaywright wrote: post #745

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a system that can do DNS redirection, MITM, deliver keyloggers, forge authorizations and place holds on all your bank accounts, clone websites, clone voices, fake phone and video calls with people that you don’t see a lot. It can’t physically kill you yet but it can make you lose your mind which imo seems worse than a quick death

Why would all of these systems be connected to a single ai? I feel like you are describing something criminal humans do through social engineering, how do you foresee this AI finding itself in this position?

> Why would all of these systems be connected to a single ai?

because someone decides to connect them either unintentionally, or intentionally for personal gain, or, more likely, for corporate purposes which seem "reasonable" or "profitable" at the time, but the unintended consequences were not thought through.

Look at that recent article linked to HN about how MSFT allowed a huge security flaw in AD for years in order to not "rock the boat" and gain a large government contract. AI will be no different.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#807

Post by insane_dreamer »

hackerlight wrote: post #389
insane_dreamer wrote: post #66

I understand the concern that a "superintelligence" will emerge that will escape its bounds and threaten humanity. That is a risk. My bigger, and more pressing worry, is that a "superintelligence" will emerge that does not escape its bounds, and the question will be which humans control it. Look no further than history to see what happens when humans acquire great power. The "cold war" nuclear arms race, which brough…

China can not win this race and I hate that this comment is going to be controversial among the circle of people that need to understand this the most. It is damn frightening that an authoritarian country is so close to number one in the race to the most powerful technology humanity has invented, and I resent people who push for open source AI for this reason alone. I don't want to live in a world where the first sup…

Agreed. The U.S. has a horrible history (as do many countries), and many things I dislike, but its current iteration is much, much better than China's totalitarianism and censorship.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#809

Post by benreesman »

sgregnt wrote: post #792
benreesman wrote: post #753

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s just clearly military R&D at this point. And it’s not even a little bit controversial that cutting edge military R&D is classified in general and to an extreme in wartime. The new thing is the lie that it’s a consumer offering. What’s new is giving the helm to shady failed social network founders with no accountability. These people aren’t retired generals with combat experience. They aren’t tenured professors a…

To me it is not clear at all, can you please elaborate why you make such a strong claim?

My opinion is based on a lot more first hand experience than most, some of which I’m at liberty to share and some that I’m not and therefore becomes “color”.

But I’m a nobody, Edward Snowden has a far more convincing track record on calling abuses of power: https://community.openai.com/t/edward-snowden-on-openai-s-de...

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#810

Post by hackerlight »

richrichie wrote: post #727
hackerlight wrote: post #708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US has to win the race because while it's true that it's no angel, it isn't an authoritarian dictatorship and there isn't an equivalence in how bad the world will end up for you and me if the authoritarian side wins the race. Monopoly power will get abused the most by the least democratic actors, which is China. We need multiple actors within the US to win to balance power. We don't need or want China to be one of th…

I am puzzled how it is OK to kill people of other countries, but not your own. US, China and Russia have all indulged in wanton mass killing of people. So that's an even keel for me. The nuking of civilians and the abuse of supremacy post cold war show that the US cannot trusted to act morally and ethically in the absence of comparable adversaries. Possession of nukes by Russia and China clearly kept the US military…

If it was liberal minded people like Deng as leader of China and Gorbachev as leader of Russia I would care a lot less and may even be in favor of open source despite their autocratic system. They'd be trending towards another Singapore at that point. Although I'd still be uneasy about it.

But I'm looking at the present moment and see too many similarities with the fascist dictatorships of the past. The nationalism, militarism, unreasonable border disputes and territorial claims and irredentist attitudes. The US just isn't that, despite their history.

Post reply on HN