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

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#881

Post by aamoyg »

dash2 wrote: post #859
benreesman wrote: post #809

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Here's Edward Snowden heroically waffling about "nuance" when asked why he hasn't spoken out more about Russia's invasion of Ukraine. On a crypto website. He became a full citizen of Russia in autumn 2022, by the way. https://www.coindesk.com/video/edward-snowden-explains-why-h...

He can get arrested and killed if he speaks out like that against Russia, especially because Putin personally intervened to give him and his wife citizenship. There is an understanding that his actions made the United States look bad and that's why he is getting this and that's pretty much it. If he causes problems in Russia he can go bye bye.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#882

Post by czl »

CRConrad wrote: post #874
czl wrote: post #857

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At the very least, because it will expand the inequality. It's a valid concern that AI technology could potentially exacerbate inequality, it's not a foregone conclusion. In fact, the widespread adoption of AI might actually help reduce inequality in several ways: If AI technology becomes more affordable and accessible, it could help level the playing field by providing people from all backgrounds with powerful too…

> It's a valid concern that AI technology could potentially exacerbate inequality, it's not a foregone conclusion. No, but looking at how most technological advance throughout history as at least initially (and here I mean not "for the first few weeks", but "for the first few centutries") exacerbated inequality rather massively, it seems not far off. > In fact, the widespread adoption of AI might actually help reduce…

> … your post feels frighteningly Pollyannaish

Your comment was bleak so I supplied a counterpoint. My view is that new technology itself is not inherently unequal - it can widen or narrow gaps depending on how it is developed, regulated, and deployed.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#883

Post by CRConrad »

hackerlight wrote: post #708
richrichie wrote: post #700

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US is no angel and it cannot be the only one which wins the race. We have hard evidence of how monopoly power gets abused in the case of the US e.g. as the sole nuclear power, it used nukes on civilians. We need every one to win this race to keep things on balance.

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…

> US has to win the race because while it's true that it's no angel, it isn't an authoritarian dictatorship

Yet.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#884

Post by CRConrad »

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…

> I am puzzled how it is OK to kill people of other countries, but not your own.

The former is rather universally regarded as regrettable, but sometims necessary: It's called "war". The latter, pretty much never.

Also, there are separate terms for slaying members of your own family, presumably because patri-, matri-, fratri- and infanticide are seen as even more egregious than "regular" homicide. Same concept, only expanded from person to populations -- from people to peoples -- seems to pretty much demand that killing your own population is seen as "less OK" than others.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#886

Post by WiSaGaN »

I remember Ilya's interview about teaching AI to love. Super intelligence on the other hand could become an almight entity in a short time. In that case, we are basically creating God, an entity that is almighty and loves human, preferrably unconditionally.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#888

Post by 343242dfsdf »

ilrwbwrkhv wrote: post #224
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…

There is no "superintelligence" or "AGI". People are falling for marketing gimmicks. These models will remain in the word vector similarity phase forever. Till the time we understand consciousness, we will not crack AGI and then it won't take brute forcing of large swaths of data, but tiny amounts. So there is nothing to worry. These "apps" might be as popular as Excel, but will go no further.

> There is no "superintelligence" or "AGI"

There is intelligence. The LLM current state-of-the-art technology produces output analog to natural intelligences.

This things are already intelligent.

Saying that LLMs aren't producing "intelligence" is like saying planes actually don't fly because they are not flapping their wings like birds.

If you run fast enough, you'll end flying at some point.

Maybe "intelligence" is just enough statistics and pattern prediction, till the point you just say "this thing is intelligent".

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#889

Post by Exendroinient23 »

WiSaGaN wrote: post #886

I remember Ilya's interview about teaching AI to love. Super intelligence on the other hand could become an almight entity in a short time. In that case, we are basically creating God, an entity that is almighty and loves human, preferrably unconditionally.

I won't trust the guy adding the concept of love to statistical systems. It screams savior complex.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#890

Post by pama »

foknvp2er12 wrote: post #875

Sad that no one has balls to say "Nah, we are not giving away our superintelligence to military use. You will fuck everything up, as you have done it with nuclear weapons".

It doesnt help if one entity says that. It might have helped if there was a way to guarrantee that all entities do it (rather than say it) and there is exactly zero chance of that happening globally for both technical and practical reasons. I think it is more productive to assume that these technologies will be used everywhere, including military.
Post reply on HN