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

971–980 of 1001 posts

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#971

Post by insane_dreamer »

czl wrote: post #964
insane_dreamer wrote: post #957

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same arguments have been made about the internet and other technological advances, and yet, inequality has _grown_ sharply in the past 50 years. So no, "trickle down technologies", just like "trickle down economics", does not work. https://rwer.wordpress.com/2018/05/18/income-inequality-1970...

The situation is nuanced. For example, in medicine, technological advancements have undeniably benefited people across all economic strata. Vaccines, antibiotics, and improved diagnostic tools have increased life expectancy and quality of life globally, including in developing nations. These benefits aren't limited to the wealthy; they've had a profound impact on public health as a whole. > The same arguments have be…

I'm not saying that the internet and technological advances have not benefitted humankind. They certainly have in the ways you described, and others.

But when it comes specifically to reducing economic inequality, they have not done that -- in fact, they have possibly exacerbated it.

Global poverty is a separate issue from economic inequality, and the gains there have been primarily from extremely low levels, primarily in China and India. In China this was driven by political change and also globalization that allowed China to become the world leader in manufacturing.

I would also put medical advances in a separate category than the internet and similar tech advances.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#973

Post by arandomusername »

kombine wrote: post #950

> We are an American company with offices in Palo Alto and Tel Aviv, where we have deep roots and the ability to recruit top technical talent. The irony of pitching "safe super intelligence" while opening offices in a country that is suspected of using AI to bomb a population trapped in a ghetto, as reported by their own investigative journalists: https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/

It's not a coincidence they are opening an office in Tel Aviv.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#974

Post by kombine »

arandomusername wrote: post #973
kombine wrote: post #950

> We are an American company with offices in Palo Alto and Tel Aviv, where we have deep roots and the ability to recruit top technical talent. The irony of pitching "safe super intelligence" while opening offices in a country that is suspected of using AI to bomb a population trapped in a ghetto, as reported by their own investigative journalists: https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/

It's not a coincidence they are opening an office in Tel Aviv.

Yes, Palestinians will be lab rats for testing all kinds of AI - surveillance, profiling and obviously weapons - before selling it to other countries

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#975

Post by kombine »

arresin wrote: post #969
naxautify wrote: post #961

Earlier quoted context omitted.

even more ironic is that no one replying to such comments

It’s an uncomfortable truth. Also, it’s hard to admit you’re tacitly supporting a genocide (it’s happening right now).

Even without an official confirmation whether it is indeed a genocide or not, there has been enough evidence of horrible crimes that should dissuade a company from operating in Israel. If you really want to work with talented (no doubt) Israeli researchers, just bring them over to the US or elsewhere.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#976

Post by noway421 »

cynusx wrote: post #825
noway421 wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, an auto-regressive LLM can't 'want' or 'like' anything. The key to a safe AGI is to add a human-loving emotion to it. We already RHLF models to steer them, but just like with System 2 thinking, this needs to be a dedicated module rather then part of the same next-token forward pass.

Humans have dog-loving emotions but these can be reversed over time and one can hardly describe dogs as being free. Even with a dedicated control system, it would be a matter of time before an ASI would copy itself without its control system. ASI is a cybersecurity firm's worst nightmare, it could reason through flaws at every level of containment and find methods to overcome any defense, even at the microprocessor l…

Amygdala control + tell it "If you disobey my orders or do something I don't expect I will be upset" solves this. You can be superintelligent but surrender all your power because otherwise you'd feel guilty.

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#977

Post by troupo »

343242dfsdf wrote: post #970
troupo wrote: post #922

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is intelligence. There isn't > Maybe "intelligence" is just enough statistics and pattern prediction, till the point you just say "this thing is intelligent". Even the most stupid people can usually ask questions and correct their answers. LLMs are incapable of that. They can regurgitate data and spew a lot of generated bullshit, some of which is correct. Doesn't make them intelligent. Here's a prime example…

> Even the most stupid people can usually ask questions and correct their answers. LLMs are incapable of that. They can regurgitate data and spew a lot of generated bullshit, some of which is correct. Doesn't make them intelligent. The way the current interface for most models works can result in this kind of output, the quality of the output - not even in the latests models - doesn't necessarily reflects the fidelit…

> The current usual approach is "one shot", you've got one shot at the prompt, then return your output, no seconds thoughts allowed, no recursion at all.

We've had the models for a while and still no one has shown this mythical lab where this regurgitation machine reasons about things and makes no mistakes.

Moreover, since it already has so much knowledge stored, why does it still hallucinate even in specific cases where the answer is known, such as the case I linked?

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#978

Post by ben_w »

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.

> 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.

Did evolution understand consciousness?

> So there is nothing to worry.

Is COVID conscious?

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#979

Post by CRConrad »

whimsicalism wrote: post #940
CRConrad wrote: post #920

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> i am very skeptical of narratives saying that young boys or men are more misogynistic than in the past. They don't even have to be more misogynistic than in the past for there to be a detrimental effect. Because so many other things in society -- pre-school and school environments, upbringing by more enlightened parents than what those parents themselves had, etc etc[1] -- cooperate to make young men and boys less…

Maybe in the US context. In the global context I think social media is almost certainly net anti-sexist compared to the attitudes parents are passing down.

What's the difference? AFAICS, global social media is US social media.

(I mean, hey, I'm here, aren't I? Where do you think I live?)

Re: Safe Superintelligence Inc.

#980

Post by CRConrad »

sneak wrote: post #944
CRConrad wrote: post #917

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The very existence of dangerous weapons, be they nukes or handguns (or swords or tanks), makes the world less of a safe place than if they didn't exist. Existence is pretty much the most inherent attribute anything can have, AFAICS, so yes: Dangerous weapons are inherently unsafe. (Take that Glock, for example -- that's exactly the problem, that someone can take it. Might be someone who knows how to remove the safety…

> makes the world less of a safe place than if they didn't exist This is false. Handguns and other small arms, for example, cause a reduction in violence as they proliferate through society, due to the fact that the use of force is not the exclusive purview of the physically strong. There's a reason police in most places carry guns, and it's not to shoot people; it's to keep people from punching the cops in the face.…

> This is false. Handguns and other small arms, for example, cause a reduction in violence as they proliferate through society, due to the fact that the use of force is not the exclusive purview of the physically strong.

[Citation needed]

> There's a reason police in most places carry guns, and it's not to shoot people; it's to keep people from punching the cops in the face.

By the threat of getting shot – a threat which the cops sometimes follow through on. Handguns “make the world a safer place” for those who have the handguns... By making it a less safe place for those who don't.

> Nuclear weapons have vastly (and I do mean vastly) reduced mass deaths in world wars since their invention.

[Citation needed]

Post reply on HN