4 ms·

> I'm so offended by the idea of this that I'll personally fund $10k of training runs myself in a jurisdiction where it isn't banned if this ever became law in

> I'm so offended by the idea of this that I'll personally fund $10k of training runs myself in a jurisdiction where it isn't banned if this ever became law in the US. And this is exactly the risk. These things will just go other places while the US trips over its salty billionaires trying to create political red tape to allow their own businesses to catch up. Surely Elon has no reservations about putting premature self driving cars on the road. Or are we just going to pretend that the last decade of his business failures have nothing to do with this hypocrisy? At least GPT hasn’t killed anyone yet. An open letter full of forged signatures and conflicts of interest aren’t convincing enough for the repercussions of the government stepping in. More than anything, this just reeks of playing on peoples fear of change. New things are scary, but in my opinion, this kind of drastic measure starts with broad interest panels that first evaluate and detail the risks. Ooo scary doesn’t cut it.

yreg 4y ago
>last decade of his business failures What world are you living in if you think Tesla and SpaceX have been in the past 10 years business failures?
- xhkkffbf 4y ago
  When people don't like Musk for whatever reason but usually it's political alignment, they just make up things. I see people continue to claim that Twitter is failing, even though it's been working fine every time I log into. With Tesla, they'll just ignore the thousands of happy customers and focus on the bad stories like the occasional exploding car. It's quite sad to see normally reliable technical people go off the rails on these issues.
ben_w 4y ago
> At least GPT hasn’t killed anyone yet. Hard to tell, given that… (0) newspapers apparently rename things for clicks: https://www.brusselstimes.com/belgium/430098/belgian-man-commits-suicide-following-exchanges-with-chatgpt https://www.brusselstimes.com/belgium/430098/belgian-man-com... (1) him being a hypocrite tells you a mistake has been made, not which of the contradictory positions is wrong. My resolution is: GPT isn't the only AI, and Musk is pretty open about wanting to put FSD AI into those androids of his, so if the Optimus AI was as good as Musk sells it as being, it would absolutely be covered by this. (2) how do you even compare the fatality rates here? GPT doesn't move, and stationary Teslas aren't very dangerous, so miles-per-death seems a poor choice. User-hours per death? Perhaps, but I don't know how many user-hours either of them have had yet. And then (3), while I don't really trust self-promotional statistics, those are the only ones I have for Tesla, which says that switching it on increased the distance between accidents: https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport Better sources appreciated, if anyone has them! :) (4) finally, as this isn't just about GPT but all AI: how much of the change in the USA's suicide rate since the release of Facebook can be attributed to the content recommendation AI that Facebook uses? What share of culpability do they and Twitter bare for the Myanmar genocide thanks to imperfections in the automation of abuse detection and removal? Did the search AI of Google and YouTube promote conspiracies, and if so how much blame do they get for the deaths proximally caused by anti-vaccination? And in reverse, over-zealous AI have seen fraud where it did not exist, and people have committed suicide as a result: https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/23/22399721/uk-post-office-software-bug-criminal-convictions-overturned https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/23/22399721/uk-post-office-s...
ok123456 4y ago
Elon musk doesn't care about this for altruistic reasons or about the future of work. He cares because he owns a social network, and these models can make spam that's impossible to detect, especially given the short size of tweets. It's naked self-interest.
lukifer 4y ago
To calibrate: Yudkowsky didn't sign because he feels a temporary moratorium doesn't go far enough, and he published a piece in Time [0] with a stance that a shooting war to enforce a ban on AI training would be justified, to prevent the extinction of the human race. I'm not convinced that he's wrong. [0] https://time.com/6266923/ai-eliezer-yudkowsky-open-letter-not-enough/ https://time.com/6266923/ai-eliezer-yudkowsky-open-letter-no...
- Zuiii 4y ago
  The US is not in any position to start a shooting war with anyone that has the ability to push this field forward and come out of it intact. AI training will continue and Yudkowsky will be proven wrong.
- mojoe 4y ago
  what a weird modern version of religious war
- _-____-_ 4y ago
  Is my assumption correct that Yudkowsky is unmarried with no kids? If so, I wonder how this shapes his pessimism on the subject. Perhaps it's more exciting to be an alarmist about the future when you've only got a few decades left on this planet and with no legacy in place to leave behind.
  - lukifer 4y ago
    Quite the opposite. FTA: > When the insider conversation is about the grief of seeing your daughter lose her first tooth, and thinking she's not going to get a chance to grow up, I believe we are past the point of playing political chess about a six-month moratorium.

yreg 4y ago

>last decade of his business failures What world are you living in if you think Tesla and SpaceX have been in the past 10 years business failures?

xhkkffbf 4y ago
When people don't like Musk for whatever reason but usually it's political alignment, they just make up things. I see people continue to claim that Twitter is failing, even though it's been working fine every time I log into. With Tesla, they'll just ignore the thousands of happy customers and focus on the bad stories like the occasional exploding car. It's quite sad to see normally reliable technical people go off the rails on these issues.

ben_w 4y ago

> At least GPT hasn’t killed anyone yet. Hard to tell, given that… (0) newspapers apparently rename things for clicks: https://www.brusselstimes.com/belgium/430098/belgian-man-commits-suicide-following-exchanges-with-chatgpt https://www.brusselstimes.com/belgium/430098/belgian-man-com... (1) him being a hypocrite tells you a mistake has been made, not which of the contradictory positions is wrong. My resolution is: GPT isn't the only AI, and Musk is pretty open about wanting to put FSD AI into those androids of his, so if the Optimus AI was as good as Musk sells it as being, it would absolutely be covered by this. (2) how do you even compare the fatality rates here? GPT doesn't move, and stationary Teslas aren't very dangerous, so miles-per-death seems a poor choice. User-hours per death? Perhaps, but I don't know how many user-hours either of them have had yet. And then (3), while I don't really trust self-promotional statistics, those are the only ones I have for Tesla, which says that switching it on increased the distance between accidents: https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport Better sources appreciated, if anyone has them! :) (4) finally, as this isn't just about GPT but all AI: how much of the change in the USA's suicide rate since the release of Facebook can be attributed to the content recommendation AI that Facebook uses? What share of culpability do they and Twitter bare for the Myanmar genocide thanks to imperfections in the automation of abuse detection and removal? Did the search AI of Google and YouTube promote conspiracies, and if so how much blame do they get for the deaths proximally caused by anti-vaccination? And in reverse, over-zealous AI have seen fraud where it did not exist, and people have committed suicide as a result: https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/23/22399721/uk-post-office-software-bug-criminal-convictions-overturned https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/23/22399721/uk-post-office-s...

ok123456 4y ago

Elon musk doesn't care about this for altruistic reasons or about the future of work. He cares because he owns a social network, and these models can make spam that's impossible to detect, especially given the short size of tweets. It's naked self-interest.

lukifer 4y ago

To calibrate: Yudkowsky didn't sign because he feels a temporary moratorium doesn't go far enough, and he published a piece in Time [0] with a stance that a shooting war to enforce a ban on AI training would be justified, to prevent the extinction of the human race. I'm not convinced that he's wrong. [0] https://time.com/6266923/ai-eliezer-yudkowsky-open-letter-not-enough/ https://time.com/6266923/ai-eliezer-yudkowsky-open-letter-no...

Zuiii 4y ago
The US is not in any position to start a shooting war with anyone that has the ability to push this field forward and come out of it intact. AI training will continue and Yudkowsky will be proven wrong.
mojoe 4y ago
what a weird modern version of religious war
_-____-_ 4y ago
Is my assumption correct that Yudkowsky is unmarried with no kids? If so, I wonder how this shapes his pessimism on the subject. Perhaps it's more exciting to be an alarmist about the future when you've only got a few decades left on this planet and with no legacy in place to leave behind.
- lukifer 4y ago
  Quite the opposite. FTA: > When the insider conversation is about the grief of seeing your daughter lose her first tooth, and thinking she's not going to get a chance to grow up, I believe we are past the point of playing political chess about a six-month moratorium.