931–940 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
50% of AI researchers think there’s a greater than 10% chance that AI causes human extinction. It’s not only openAI and sam who think this is dangerous.
They have no real models to base their predictions on. It's speculation at the level of "what happens if an immovable meets an unstoppable force". No rigor in it.
While I'd agree with sentiment in this threat that GPT-4 and current AI models are not dangerous yet, I guess what I don't understand is why so many people here believe we should allow private companies to continue to develop the technology until someone develops something dangerous? Those here who don't believe AI should be regulated, do you not believe AI can be dangerous? Is that you believe a dangerous AI is so f…
I think the discussion has a thick veil of anxiety and sci-fi movies. It's very strong on hypotheticals and very light on actual evidence of harm committed by AI and actors. "We need to act before there is evidence" is hard to argue with, thankfully human imagination is not regulated yet.
While I'd agree with sentiment in this threat that GPT-4 and current AI models are not dangerous yet, I guess what I don't understand is why so many people here believe we should allow private companies to continue to develop the technology until someone develops something dangerous? Those here who don't believe AI should be regulated, do you not believe AI can be dangerous? Is that you believe a dangerous AI is so f…
They are already dangerous in the way they cause global anxiety and fear in people, and also because the effects of their usage to the economy and real lives of the people are unpredictable. AI needs to be regulated and controlled, the alternative is chaos. Unfortunately the current demented fossile and greedy monopolist lead system is most likely incapable of creating a sane & fair environment for the development of…
This is the message I shared with my senator (edited to remove information which could identify me). I hope others will send similar messages. Dear Senator [X], I am an engineer working for [major employer in the state]. I am extremely concerned about the message that Sam Altman is sharing with the Judiciary committee today. Altman wants to create regulatory roadblocks to developing AI. My company produces AI-enabled…
You lost me at "While AI regulation is important" - nope, congress does not need to regulate AI.
Does scikit-learn count or we are just not going to bother defining what we mean by "AI"?
"AI" is whatever congress says it is? That is an absolutely terrible idea.
We need to MAKE SURE that AI as a technology ISN'T controlled by a small number of powerful corporations with connections to governments. To expound, this just seems like a power grab to me, to "lock in" the lead and keep AI controlled by a small number of corporations that can afford to license and operate the technologies. Obviously, this will create a critical nexus of control for a small number of well connected…
You're not wrong, except in so far as that's parochial. A government-controlled… never mind artificial god, a government-controlled story teller can be devastating. I don't buy Musk's claim ChatGPT is "woke" (or even that the term is coherent enough to be tested), but I can say that each government requiring AI to locally adhere to national mythology, will create self-reinforcing cognitive blind spots, because that a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you mean US by 'we', it is problematic because AI inventions are happening all over the globe, much more outside US than inside.
Name one significant progress in the field of LLMs that happened outside the US. Basically all the scientific papers came from Stanford, CMU, and other US universities. And the major players in the field are all American companies (OpenAI + Microsoft, Google, AnthropicAI, etc.)
Other than that there's also things like roformer, but I'm going to assume you won't count that as significant. US universities then certainly don't produce anything significant either though.
It's very sad that people lack the imagination for the possible horrors that lie beyond. You don't even need the imagination; Hinton, Bengio, Tegmark, Yudkowsky, Musk, etc. are spelling it out for you. This moment, 80% of comments are derisive, and you actually have zero idea how much is computer generated bot content meant to sway opinion by post-GPT AI industry who see themselves as becoming the next iPhone-era bil…
There is an extreme conflict of interest in the OpenAI's proposal. I don't see regular people protesting and asking politicians to act, I don't see small business owners writing petitions. I see a small number of highly invested, very rich individuals weaponizing media attention and lobbying to create extremely favorable combinations for their business.
If you did watch the hearings it would have been pretty clear that the goal of any such licensing would be to prevent the runaway AI scenario or AGI from being unknowingly being created. It's obvious that some sort of agency would need to be set up far in advance of when it's possible for runaway AI to happen. Regulatory capture was also specifically brought up as a potential downside.
This article is just pushing a cynical narrative for clicks and y'all are eating it up.