8 ms·
Good question. I suppose the "we" is us, the engineers. And it's not so much slowing progress, just doing what this system card is doing: thinking about potent
by marcus_holmes 4y ago
Good question. I suppose the "we" is us, the engineers.
And it's not so much slowing progress, just doing what this system card is doing: thinking about potential applications of the technology we're building, and mitigating the bad ones if possible.
It's an interesting thought experiment; if, say, the team responsible for defining SMTP had done this, what would they have done differently, if anything?
- brookst 4y agoThe SMTP example is interesting. There have been numerous proposed replacements, but the network effect problem makes technically superior approaches unviable. So for SMTP I’d say, if that team had done this, someone else would have shipped a basic, flawed protocol first and SMTP would never have gotten off the ground. But… AI doesn’t have those same network effects. At least not technical ones. Business ones to some degree.
- marcus_holmes 4y agoI dunno, I'm not sure there were any competitors for the original SMTP spec (but I don't know for sure). But if there were, it would still have been useful for them all to produce an evaluation of their potential for evil.