Yes yes fellow consumers! We must impose an artificial monopoly to protect ourselves!
Only one company can be trusted, their competitors are evil. We must ban them.
Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
961–970 of 1001 posts
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#962Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sam is a snake. The goal is to fuck everyone else. He is scared that someone will beat his tech and the hype is gone. Which is going to happen. Matter of months.
I suspect that he knows that this is a 'local maxima' as someone put it, and the field will stagnate once the size and attention of models approach the limits of available computing resources. He wants others kept out of the field not only because they could beat him but because he would wants to horde available processing power.
That is a well thought possibility. But with MS developing their own in-house SOC, that is not going to be an issue as they can always prioritize to their investments. But anything is possible. We need apple to release some competitive and dedicated low power GPUs.
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#963This 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…
> regulation should focus on ensuring the safety of AIs once they are ready to be put into widespread use - this would allow companies and individuals to research new AIs freely while still ensuring that AI products are properly reviewed. While in general I share the view that _research_ should be unencumbered, but deployment should be regulated, I do take issue with your view that safety only matters once they are r…
I like jobs too but what about the risks of AI? Some people I respect a lot are arguing - convincingly in my opinion - that this tech might just end human civilization. Should we roll the die on this?
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#964This is quite incredible Could you imagine if MS had convinced the govt back in the day, to require a special license to build an operating system (this blocking Linux and everything open)? It’s essentially what’s happening now, Except it is OpenAI instead of MS, and it is AI instead of Linux AI is the new Linux, they know it, and are trying desperately to stop it from happening
Do you think AIs are safe? I'd bet that if you would have a convincing argument that they are, then there wouldn't be a need for regulations. If you just assume that it can't possibly be that bad you should really read what the critics have to say. I don't see a way around regulations and I'm hoping that they'll get them right because a mistake here will likely cost us everything
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#965Earlier quoted context omitted.
The risks are not high. I see this as simply a power play to convince people that OpenAI is better than they actually are. I am not saying they're stupid but I wouldn't consider Sam Altman to be an AI expert by virtue of being OpenAI's CEO.
So the fact that Geoffrey Hinton, Stuart Russell, Dario Amodei, Shane Legg, Demis Hassabis, Paul Christiano, Jürgen Schmidhuber, among many others, think that there's a non-trivial chance of human extinction from AI in the next few decades, should be a reason to actually evaluate the arguments for x-risk, yeah?
Nope. All you need to know is that there are billions of people whose lives have been slightly impacted by even the internet.
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#966Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#967I wish he would just stop sharing his unsubstantiated opinions, tweets included, he got worse very fast when he entered his AI arc.
Is it worse than the crypto arc?
I'm not even sure, this time there is a more realistic risk that people outside of the industry listen to what he says.
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#968Earlier quoted context omitted.
And produce something tangible and useful, instead of talking like if sci-fi stories were real.
Right? Aren't we constantly told that scientists smarter than us little people can't figure out what's going on inside of deep learning structures? How do we know they might not be more moral because they don't yet have a limbic system mucking up their logic with the three f's? Orthogonality says nothing about motivation, only that it is independent of intelligence. Maybe the paperclip collector bot will decide that…
Clearly stating what you know and don't is the honest thing to do, but building hype is better for business.
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#969Why does this idea matter, when open source models and tools are moving at the speed they are in already?
Wouldn’t such licenses create even greater incentive to develop and release models and tools outside the regulatory environment?
Re: Sam Altman goes before US Congress to propose licenses for building AI
#970Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously, I'm very concerned by the view being taken here. AI has the capacity to do a ton of harm very quickly. A couple of examples: - Scamming via impersonation - Misinformation - Usage of AI in a way that could have serious legal ramifications for incorrect responses - Severe economic displacement Congress can and should examine these issues. Just because OP works at an AI doesnt' mean that company can't exist i…
You're never going to be able to regulate what a person's computer can run. We've been through this song and dance with cryptography. Trying to keep it out of the hands of bad actors will be a waste of time, effort, and money. These resources should be spent lessening the impact rather than trying to completely control it.
I hate to say this because it would be shocking, but computers as we know them could be taken off people.
Again it sounds extreme but in an extreme situation it could happen / not impossible.