4 ms·

I have seen DAIR members perform ad hominem attacks on qualified researchers and first movers in AI Safety (eg EA community, Yoshua Bengio, etc), they divert th

I have seen DAIR members perform ad hominem attacks on qualified researchers and first movers in AI Safety (eg EA community, Yoshua Bengio, etc), they divert the discussion away from x-risks and focus on attacking individuals. For instance, look at the reaction of AI pioneers expressing interest in studying ai safety. This people seem to be focusing way more energy on attacks and discreding than making actual progress that addresses the case of ai safety. I do not understand diverting discussions about existential harm with diversity/patriachy, they seem to be separate discussions. Whereas they seem to attack anyone working on AI Safety who is a white man. https://twitter.com/Abebab/status/1667150619029676033 https://twitter.com/Abebab/status/1667150619029676033 DAIR: https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1667251985844666369 https://twitter.com/timnitGebru/status/1667251985844666369

gmerc 3y ago
Which is a red flag. This technology is here today and usable by anyone. So when people focus heavily on ad hominems, it’s likely they have to actual argument or have not taken the time to engage with the technology Anyone confidently parroting about stochastic parrots and hallucinations for example has slept through the last 3 months for example. Take the article on chatgpt humor yesterday .. dozens of pages of arxiv and zero mentions of the word temperature tells us all we need to know.