4 ms·

On the off chance that you're serious: Even if you can pull the plug before it is too late, less moral people like Meta Mark will not unplug theirs. And as soon

by oefnak 4y ago

On the off chance that you're serious: Even if you can pull the plug before it is too late, less moral people like Meta Mark will not unplug theirs. And as soon as it has access to the internet, it can copy itself. Good luck pulling the plug of the internet.

gambiting 4y ago
I'm 100% serious. I literally don't understand your concern at all. >>And as soon as it has access to the internet, it can copy itself. So can viruses, including ones that can "intelligently" modify themselves to avoid detection, and yet this isn't a major problem. How is this any differenent? >>Good luck pulling the plug of the internet. I could reach down and pull my ethernet cable out but it would make posting this reply a bit difficult.
- toast0 4y ago
  > So can viruses, including ones that can "intelligently" modify themselves to avoid detection, and yet this isn't a major problem. How is this any differenent? How long did it take to get Code Red or the Nimda worm off the internet? It's a different internet today, but it's also much easier to get access to a vast amount of computing power if you've got access to payments. Depending on the requirements to replicate, one could imagine a suddenly concious entity setting up cloud hosting of itself, possible through purloined payment accounts.
- cmorez 4y ago
  > So can viruses, including ones that can "intelligently" modify themselves to avoid detection, and yet this isn't a major problem. How is this any different? I now regret spending half an hour writing a response to your earlier comment. You can't tell why a mass deployment of motivated autonomous "NSO-9000s" might be more dangerous than a virus that just changes its signature to fool a executable scanner? I don't believe you. If you honestly believe that an "intelligent" (as adaptive as a slime mold) virus is basically as dangerous as a maliciously deployed AGI then there is literally nothing an AGI could do that would make you consider safety is important during the endeavor of building one.
  - gambiting 4y ago
    First of all, I'm sorry you regret replying to me, that's not something I aim for in HN discussions. >>You can't tell why a mass deployment of motivated autonomous "NSO-9000s" might be more dangerous than a virus that just changes its signature to fool a executable scanner? I don't believe you. So I just want to address that - of course I can tell the difference, but I just can't believe we will arrive at that level of crazy intelligence straight away. Like others have said - more like AGI with the capacity to learn like a small child, then years of training later they grow to be something like an adult. More human facsimile less HAL9000. I only brought up self modifying viruses because that's the example of current tech that's extremely incentivised to multiply and avoid detection, that's its main reason for existence, and it does that very poorly.
gwern 4y ago
Worth noting that current models like Google LaMDA appear to already have access to the live Internet. The LaMDA paper says it was trained to request arbitrary URLs from the live Internet to get text snippets to use in its chat contexts. Then you have everyone else, like Adept https://www.adept.ai/post/introducing-adept https://www.adept.ai/post/introducing-adept (Forget anything about how secure 'boxes' will be - will there be boxes at all?)
jjoonathan 4y ago
...and even if Mark's bot is dogshit, Musk will cheerfully sell embodied versions by the millions to replace workers, systematically handing over our industrial infrastructure first to an unrestrained capital class and then to the robots. I'm not even sure which will be worse.

by oefnak 4y ago

gambiting 4y ago

I'm 100% serious. I literally don't understand your concern at all. >>And as soon as it has access to the internet, it can copy itself. So can viruses, including ones that can "intelligently" modify themselves to avoid detection, and yet this isn't a major problem. How is this any differenent? >>Good luck pulling the plug of the internet. I could reach down and pull my ethernet cable out but it would make posting this reply a bit difficult.

toast0 4y ago
> So can viruses, including ones that can "intelligently" modify themselves to avoid detection, and yet this isn't a major problem. How is this any differenent? How long did it take to get Code Red or the Nimda worm off the internet? It's a different internet today, but it's also much easier to get access to a vast amount of computing power if you've got access to payments. Depending on the requirements to replicate, one could imagine a suddenly concious entity setting up cloud hosting of itself, possible through purloined payment accounts.
cmorez 4y ago
> So can viruses, including ones that can "intelligently" modify themselves to avoid detection, and yet this isn't a major problem. How is this any different? I now regret spending half an hour writing a response to your earlier comment. You can't tell why a mass deployment of motivated autonomous "NSO-9000s" might be more dangerous than a virus that just changes its signature to fool a executable scanner? I don't believe you. If you honestly believe that an "intelligent" (as adaptive as a slime mold) virus is basically as dangerous as a maliciously deployed AGI then there is literally nothing an AGI could do that would make you consider safety is important during the endeavor of building one.
- gambiting 4y ago
  First of all, I'm sorry you regret replying to me, that's not something I aim for in HN discussions. >>You can't tell why a mass deployment of motivated autonomous "NSO-9000s" might be more dangerous than a virus that just changes its signature to fool a executable scanner? I don't believe you. So I just want to address that - of course I can tell the difference, but I just can't believe we will arrive at that level of crazy intelligence straight away. Like others have said - more like AGI with the capacity to learn like a small child, then years of training later they grow to be something like an adult. More human facsimile less HAL9000. I only brought up self modifying viruses because that's the example of current tech that's extremely incentivised to multiply and avoid detection, that's its main reason for existence, and it does that very poorly.

gwern 4y ago

Worth noting that current models like Google LaMDA appear to already have access to the live Internet. The LaMDA paper says it was trained to request arbitrary URLs from the live Internet to get text snippets to use in its chat contexts. Then you have everyone else, like Adept https://www.adept.ai/post/introducing-adept https://www.adept.ai/post/introducing-adept (Forget anything about how secure 'boxes' will be - will there be boxes at all?)

jjoonathan 4y ago

...and even if Mark's bot is dogshit, Musk will cheerfully sell embodied versions by the millions to replace workers, systematically handing over our industrial infrastructure first to an unrestrained capital class and then to the robots. I'm not even sure which will be worse.