7 ms·
> What if it uses the internet to seek out zero day vulnerabilities and exploit them routinely? How would GPT-4 make this more likely or scalable?
by roflyear 4y ago
> What if it uses the internet to seek out zero day vulnerabilities and exploit them routinely?
How would GPT-4 make this more likely or scalable?
- jadbox 4y agoI'm not really picking on GPT4, but My point really applies to any LLM on autonomous Internet connected mode.
- roflyear 4y agoYeah, I don't mean to be specific about GPT-4 either, it's just the most powerful model so often convenient to use as an example.
- ALittleLight 4y agoThere is the possibility of API upgrades at OpenAI flipping this from "not dangerous" to "dangerous". If the AI just needs some amount of intelligence to become dangerous, then it may cross that threshold suddenly - and with OpenAI developers unaware that their next round of changes will be automatically deployed to an autonomous agent and with the auto-GPT runners unaware that new changes may substantially increase the power of the model.
- roflyear 4y agoI'm not really sure why we are assuming that these language models ever can have any form of intelligence? To me, this is just like saying "we don't know if the latest CPU released by intel will enable Linux to become intelligent"
- visarga 4y agoHave you seen what they can do? /s
- roflyear 4y agoYeah next time someone says this to me in earnest I'm going to lose my mind.
- ALittleLight 4y agoLanguage models obviously have some form of intelligence right now. You can have GPT-4 take SAT tests, play Chess, write poetry, predict what will happen in different social scenarios, answer theory of mind questions, ask questions, solve programming puzzles, etc. There are some measures that GPTs are clearly below human levels, some where they are far beyond, and some where they are within human range. The question as to whether or not language models have any form of intelligence has been definitively answered - yes, they can and do - by existence proof. What definition or description of intelligence do you use such that you doubt that language models could have it? Would you have had this same definition in the year 2010?
- mjr00 4y ago> Language models obviously have some form of intelligence right now. This is not "obvious" in any sense of the word. At best, it's highly debatable.
- mythrwy 4y agoWould you settle for "behave exactly as if they had some form of intelligence"? Because from where I sit it's a distinction without a meaningful difference.
- mjr00 4y ago> Would you settle for "behave exactly as if they had some form of intelligence"? Sure, it behaves as if it has some form of intelligence in the sense that it can take external input, perform actions in reaction to this input, and produce outputs dependent on the input. This historically has been known as a computer program.
- pixl97 4y agoYou're a computer program?
- 4y ago
- jstanley 4y agoIt doesn't. It makes the consequences more dramatic, if it (accidentally, even!) works out how to create its own successor, because at that point the genie is out of the bottle and you won't get it back in.
- roflyear 4y agoYeah maybe there is that possibility, but there is the possibility of a person doing that too. GPT-4 is probably less probably to be able to do that than a person.
- visarga 4y agoNeeds a big honking datacenter or billions of compute credits and safety for 6-12 months.
- tanseydavid 4y agoDoesn't Alpaca seem to suggest that assumption is no longer true?
- visarga 4y agoAlpaca rides on LLaMA. And LLaMA was trained on 1T tokens for a long time. The fine-tuning takes one hour with low rank adaptation. But pre-training a new model takes months.