Waiting in order to have more grifters and parasites be part of the AI revolution would be a horrible.
Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter
881–890 of 1001 posts
Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter
#882I found Bill Joy's, “Why the future doesn't need us,” much more convincing.
Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter
#883Ignoring the distaste I hold for precautionary principle arguments, the impracticality of the recommended solutions is laughable. The genie is out of the bottle regarding LLMs thanks to the public availability of Llama and the related support data necessary for any individual to run them on sub-$5K hardware. The computing costs of engaging in training and modifying is within the realm of a modestly wealthy individual…
We need to build even bigger and better LLMs ASAP "primus inter pares". Better models will help us finding better solutions.
Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter
#884[deleted]
Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter
#885What would stop other countries from continuing to progress their training? Seems futile at this point.
Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter
#886Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Climate change mitigation, which more closely resembles AI safety in both complexity and (lack of) barriers to entry, has been sporadic, inconsistent, and only enacted to the extent... Climate change mitigation is the perfect example. Nobody is doing anything, nobody seems to care, everyone cheats with ridiculous carbon credits or carbon offset vouchers made out of thin air, etc. It's likely the planet will become…
It is just not true that “nobody is doing anything.” CO2 emissions in the United States and Europe are falling and have been doing so for years. To say that is nothing is misrepresenting reality.
They are falling because we've moving them in other sides of the globe (such as less and less manufacturing or food production in EU/US).
Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter
#887And I’d like world hunger to be ended. Frankly my wish seems more plausible.
yes so let's not bother trying to stop an existential threat. have you considered the possible consequences of all this?
An AI that's been tampered with by the benvolent AI grifters and "AI ethics" people seems like a much bigger threat.
Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter
#888If they simulate a massive enough neural net, fast enough with real time inputs/outputs, on a long enough time-frame, what to do if it becomes self-conscious?
Pulling the plug would be brutal murder.
That said, it seems it is nearly impossible, even for a supercomputer to get close to the "size"/"speed" of one human brain which seems to be the basic requirements for consciousness to emerge.
Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter
#889Two-party iterated prisoner's dilemma is hard enough. Sensible players will coordinate with something like tit-for-tat, but that only works when both parties start off on the right foot. Regardless of initial strategy, the chances of degenerating towards the mutual-defection Nash equilibrium increase with the number of parties. The only prior example of world coordination at this level would be nuclear disarmament ac…
we had the Human cloning moratorium
https://www.science.org/content/article/biologists-adopt-clo...
I am not an expert, does anyone know how that one worked out?
Asked ChatGPT
> Did the Human cloning moratorium work?
Yes, the Human Cloning Moratorium did work. It was initially established in 2002 and renewed in 2020 to Ban All forms of Human Reproductive Cloning as well as Research into Human Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer. Despite certain scientific advances and proposals for legislative reforms, reproductive cloning of humans continues to be prohibited under the terms of the moratorium.
> Where there any violations?
Violations of the Human Cloning Moratorium have been reported. In 2011, Chinese Scientists claimed to have successfully cloned a human embryo, though the scientist has since denied any involvement in this experimentation. Additionally, reports have suggested that a company in the United States has been attempting to clone a human, though these reports have not been confirmed. As such, these potential instances of human cloning have not been considered violations of the moratorium.
> But you just said that the moratorium did work, isn't there a contradiction between you second and your first statement?
There is no contradiction between the two statements. While violations of the moratorium have been reported, the moratorium as a whole is still in effect and has been successful in prohibiting reproductive cloning of humans. The occasional violations of the moratorium do not indicate that the moratorium has been unsuccessful in achieving its purpose.
> So will we see a war between clones and robots?
No, there is no indication that a war between clones and robots will occur. The Human Cloning Moratorium does not place any restrictions on the development of robotics or artificial intelligence, and so the development of these technologies is not expected to lead to a conflict between the two.
Re: Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter
#890Two-party iterated prisoner's dilemma is hard enough. Sensible players will coordinate with something like tit-for-tat, but that only works when both parties start off on the right foot. Regardless of initial strategy, the chances of degenerating towards the mutual-defection Nash equilibrium increase with the number of parties. The only prior example of world coordination at this level would be nuclear disarmament ac…
True, and everybody involved is fully aware of this, which makes this no more than a virtue signaling initiative. "It's just for show and attention" at best.