5 ms·

The 'Don't Look Up' Thinking That Could Doom Us with AI

17 points by kvee 3y ago

Trouble_007 3y ago
https://archive.is/gMi8q https://archive.is/gMi8q
reducesuffering 3y ago
[flagged]
- suddenclarity 3y ago
  Does this mean we will also get AIphobes or is it only a one way lane?
- srslack 3y ago
  That's funny. It's just like high profile climate activists that invest in beachfront property despite their insistence that it's the apocalypse and properties like that will be underwater in less than a decade. So too do companies and individuals who invest and sell "AI", bad facial recognition, faulty risk modeling with biases, that are causing real harm and problems right now, hem hawing about the risk and "ethics" of something other than what they sell causing issues. They also want the same people who are still figuring out e-mail to regulate it. i.e. give them an avenue for regulatory capture. Curious. Can you help me, from the following definitions since no one can seem to pinpoint a single definition of "AGI", where the "AGI risk" is from text prediction models? "[AGI is] an autonomous system that surpasses human capabilities at the majority of economically valuable work" "[AGI is a] hypothetical intelligent agent which can learn to replicate any intellectual task that human beings or other animals can"
- dalmo3 3y ago
  Mayan Apocalypse deniers were right, though...
hammyhavoc 3y ago
It's bold to assume that we will create anything that can care. Even a paperclip maximizer. It will just get taken offline as not fit for purpose, these things are expensive to keep running. If they aren't generating positive value and doing as instructed then there's no point keeping it online. I doubt we will ever create an "intelligent mind". If we build something that is capable of caring about anything rather than accurately following instructions and not "hallucinating" then we are doing AI wrong and we have created a slave rather than a machine.
- mhb 3y ago
  taken offline? That's laughable. The argument for keeping it in a box is not even made any longer. Developers are working as fast as they can to proliferate it across the internet because it's already so useful. What do you think the outcry will be like when it is 10x better and you tell all the internet users you want to shut down there new super-helpful friend?
pshirshov 3y ago
LLMs are not intelligent.

17 points by kvee 3y ago

Trouble_007 3y ago

https://archive.is/gMi8q https://archive.is/gMi8q

reducesuffering 3y ago

[flagged]

suddenclarity 3y ago
Does this mean we will also get AIphobes or is it only a one way lane?
srslack 3y ago
That's funny. It's just like high profile climate activists that invest in beachfront property despite their insistence that it's the apocalypse and properties like that will be underwater in less than a decade. So too do companies and individuals who invest and sell "AI", bad facial recognition, faulty risk modeling with biases, that are causing real harm and problems right now, hem hawing about the risk and "ethics" of something other than what they sell causing issues. They also want the same people who are still figuring out e-mail to regulate it. i.e. give them an avenue for regulatory capture. Curious. Can you help me, from the following definitions since no one can seem to pinpoint a single definition of "AGI", where the "AGI risk" is from text prediction models? "[AGI is] an autonomous system that surpasses human capabilities at the majority of economically valuable work" "[AGI is a] hypothetical intelligent agent which can learn to replicate any intellectual task that human beings or other animals can"
dalmo3 3y ago
Mayan Apocalypse deniers were right, though...

hammyhavoc 3y ago

It's bold to assume that we will create anything that can care. Even a paperclip maximizer. It will just get taken offline as not fit for purpose, these things are expensive to keep running. If they aren't generating positive value and doing as instructed then there's no point keeping it online. I doubt we will ever create an "intelligent mind". If we build something that is capable of caring about anything rather than accurately following instructions and not "hallucinating" then we are doing AI wrong and we have created a slave rather than a machine.

mhb 3y ago
taken offline? That's laughable. The argument for keeping it in a box is not even made any longer. Developers are working as fast as they can to proliferate it across the internet because it's already so useful. What do you think the outcry will be like when it is 10x better and you tell all the internet users you want to shut down there new super-helpful friend?

pshirshov 3y ago

LLMs are not intelligent.