Regulatory capture and monopolies are now as American as apple pie.
'Now'?
Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
91–100 of 1001 posts
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#92I'll do you one better--to negative infinity mod points and beyond! I can put a 13b parameter LLM on my phone. That makes it a bearable arm. Arms are not defined under the US Constitution, just the right of _the_people_ to keep them shall not be infringed, but it is a weapon to be sure.
Got some news for you about munitions control laws.
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is it so hard to hear this perspective? Like, genuinely curious. This is the first I hear of someone cogently putting this thought out there, but it seems rather painfully obvious -- even if perhaps incorrect, but certainly a perspective that is very easy to comprehend and one that merits a lot of discussion. Why is it almost nonexistent? I remember even in the hay day of crypto fever you'd still have A LOT of fo…
> Why is it so hard to hear this perspective? Like, genuinely curious. Because people have different definition of what intelligence is. Recreating the human brain in a computer would definitely be neat and interesting but you don't need that nor AGI to be revolutionary. LLMs, as perfect Chinese Rooms, lack a mind or human intelligence but demonstrate increasingly sophisticated behavior. If they can perform tasks bet…
That changes nothing on the hyping of science fiction "risk" of those intelligences "escaping the box" and killing us all.
The argument for regulation in that case would be because of the socio-economic risk of taking people's jobs, essentially.
So, again: pure regulatory capture.
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#94Of course one of the first companies to create a commercial "AI" would lobby the government to create regulatory barriers to competition in order to provide a moat for their business. While their product is undeniably good, I am disappointed in OpenAI's business practices in this instance.
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Imagine thinking that regression based function approximators are capable of anything other than fitting the data you give it. Are you aware that you are an 80 billion neuron biological neural network?
And this is why I always hate how computer parts are named with biological terms.... a neural network's neuron doesn't share much with a human brain's neuron Just like a CPU isn't "like your brain" and HDD "like your memories" Absolutely nothing says our current approach is the right one to mimic a human brain
>a neural network's neuron doesn't share much with a human brain's neuron
What are the key differences?
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is it so hard to hear this perspective? Like, genuinely curious. This is the first I hear of someone cogently putting this thought out there, but it seems rather painfully obvious -- even if perhaps incorrect, but certainly a perspective that is very easy to comprehend and one that merits a lot of discussion. Why is it almost nonexistent? I remember even in the hay day of crypto fever you'd still have A LOT of fo…
> Why is it so hard to hear this perspective? Like, genuinely curious. Because people have different definition of what intelligence is. Recreating the human brain in a computer would definitely be neat and interesting but you don't need that nor AGI to be revolutionary. LLMs, as perfect Chinese Rooms, lack a mind or human intelligence but demonstrate increasingly sophisticated behavior. If they can perform tasks bet…
I have a chain saw that can cut better than me, a car that can go faster, a computer that can do math better, etc.
We've been doing this forever with everything. Building tools is what makes us unique. Why is building what amounts to a calculator/spreadsheet/CAD program for language somehow a Rubicon that cannot be crossed? Did people freak out this much about computers replacing humans when they were shown to be good at math?
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Imagine thinking that regression based function approximators are capable of anything other than fitting the data you give it. Are you aware that you are an 80 billion neuron biological neural network?
And this is why I always hate how computer parts are named with biological terms.... a neural network's neuron doesn't share much with a human brain's neuron Just like a CPU isn't "like your brain" and HDD "like your memories" Absolutely nothing says our current approach is the right one to mimic a human brain
The human brain works around a lot of limiting biological functions. The necessary architecture to fully mimic a human brain on a computer might not look anything like the actual human brain.
That said, there are 8B+ of us and counting so unless there is magic involved, I don't see why we couldn't do a "1:1" replica of it (maybe far) in the future.
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why is it so hard to hear this perspective? Like, genuinely curious. Because people have different definition of what intelligence is. Recreating the human brain in a computer would definitely be neat and interesting but you don't need that nor AGI to be revolutionary. LLMs, as perfect Chinese Rooms, lack a mind or human intelligence but demonstrate increasingly sophisticated behavior. If they can perform tasks bet…
That changes nothing on the hyping of science fiction "risk" of those intelligences "escaping the box" and killing us all. The argument for regulation in that case would be because of the socio-economic risk of taking people's jobs, essentially. So, again: pure regulatory capture.
There's no denying this is regulatory capture by OpenAI to secure their (gigantic) bag and that the "AI will kill us all" meme is not based in reality and plays on the fact that the majority of people do not understand LLMs.
I was simply explaining why I believe your perspective is not represented in the discussions in the media, etc. If these models were not getting incredibly good at mimicking intelligence, it would not be possible to play on people's fears of it.
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#99Imagine thinking that regression based function approximators are capable of anything other than fitting the data you give it. Then imagine willfully hyping up and scaring people who don't understand, and because it can predict words you take advantage of the human tendency to anthropomorphize, so it follows that it is something capable of generalized and adaptable intelligence. Shame on all of the people involved in…
Imagine thinking that NAND gates are capable of anything other than basic logic.
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#100> In his first appearance before a congressional panel, CEO Sam Altman is set to advocate licensing or registration requirements for AI with certain capabilities, his written testimony shows. papers for thee but not for me
Is this similar to how it is handled in the life sciences?
Of course, because they're giving people drugs capable of incapacitating them if handled wrongly....AI, on the other hand, why should someone need a license to train their large language model?