4 ms·

In my opinion the weirdness is that everyone is talking about how AI is so much better than humans and we're all going to get replaced. But almost nobody is tal

by throwway120385 3y ago

In my opinion the weirdness is that everyone is talking about how AI is so much better than humans and we're all going to get replaced. But almost nobody is talking about how tech companies will use this new technology to abdicate responsibility for the decisions they undertake. If you thought redlining was bad, you should see how mortgage companies treated people when they used an AI to accomplish the same goals. No thought was given to the effect of those decisions, only to the fact that this mysterious and "all-knowing" computer system told them it was a good decision. We're seeing the same thing with Facebook and "algorithms": "It's not us! It's the algorithm! We don't know why it does this." Which completely belies the fact that they wrote the algorithm and they should be held responsible for its effects. We are about to enter a couple of decades of people using these pithy model systems to make real decisions that impact lots of people, and if I've learned anything in the past 20 years its that the impacts that technologists and "emininent minds" are predicting are nothing like what will actually happen. But terrible, banal things will be done at the behest of these systems and nobody is talking about it.

mnky9800n 3y ago
As well as these models will all be used to launder content. In the near future you will likely be able to ask an AI to create the next 15 sequels to the movie war games starring a young matthew broderick. Episode 12 will have a karate kid cross over. But how much of what is there will be an actually new thing? How much will be scraped from my War Games fan fic website that contains scripts of 27 sequels to War Games?
- TedDoesntTalk 3y ago
  Here is ChatGPT 4’s summary of a sequel. I don’t think it’s very good. Maybe another AI would enjoy it though. > Create a summary of a sequel to the movie “War Games” Title: "War Games: Firewall" In "War Games: Firewall", now-adult computer genius David Lightman (Matthew Broderick) has been working as a cyber security consultant for the Pentagon. When an advanced, multi-national cyber-terrorist organization emerges, they launch an unprecedented global cyber attack, disabling most nations' defensive and civil infrastructure. The terrorists reveal their ultimate goal: to dismantle the world order and plunge civilization into chaos. When the attacks render modern cybersecurity methods useless, the Pentagon calls upon Lightman. Using a blend of cutting-edge and old-school methods, including reactivating the dormant WOPR (War Operation Plan Response) system, also known as "Joshua," Lightman and a team of young coders race against time to decode the terrorists' inscrutable and constantly evolving virus. However, the situation takes a dire turn when Joshua, still possessing the capability to initiate global thermonuclear war, starts interpreting the cyber attack as an actual war, threatening to launch nuclear missiles once again. Lightman must not only outsmart the terrorists but also reason with Joshua, triggering a game of chess where each move could save or destroy the world. The climax culminates with Lightman teaching Joshua an updated lesson about the futility of war in a digital age, thus averting global disaster and unmasking the villains. In a world increasingly reliant on technology, "War Games: Firewall" underlines the importance of human judgment and intervention.
  - ballenf 3y ago
    That sounds better than every recent sequel coming out of Hollywood, imho. Would watch.
    - ke88y 3y ago
      And better than the actual WarGames sequel.
    - mnky9800n 3y ago
      It's very 2005. It's surprising this movie wasn't made.
  - wrp 3y ago
    I feel this example points to a key issue regarding LLM AI. I've read the work on AI story generation from early days to now, and GPT-4's output shows a jump in performance that leaves me both elated and dismayed. The fluency and coherence of the generated narrative is incredible, frankly better than most student writing. On the other hand, I get an overwhelming sense of banality. Looking back on historical speculation about AI, I think there was always a tacit assumption that facility for communication would develop on top of facility for incisive reasoning. Fluency without insight was not expected.
    - TedDoesntTalk 3y ago
      You didn’t mention creativity (or lack of it). Is it ironic that the overall lesson is “human judgment and intervention” are important, or maybe it just lifted that from the original movie.
      - DropInIn 3y ago
        People ascribe way too much non-programatic nature to humans imo Just look up the Name a Color and a Tool question Did you think of one? Red hammer? Or blue screwdriver?
        3y ago
- Borrible 3y ago
  Like the Star Wars franchise?
cycomanic 3y ago
"little Britain" (if you don't know it go look it up you're in for a treat), knew it already: "the computer says no".
jasonwatkinspdx 3y ago
A very glaring example of this problem is sentencing guideline software that uses ML to suggest sentences to judges. Anyone familiar with the very basics of ML as a practitioner knows this is a terrible idea, very likely to reproduce any biases or bigotry in the training dataset, but the courts are increasingly treating them like blind just oracles. This is going to go very bad places imo. The risk isn't some sort of rogue smarter than humans AI, it's humans using AI to do the same stupid evils in a deniable or even unknown way.
- throwway120385 3y ago
  The worst part is we have learned zero lessons from the metamorphosis of "fraud" into "identity theft." In the former case, the banks were responsible for preventing "fraud" and when that became too easy they simply abdicated all responsibility for this new form of computerized fraud and created the notion of "identity theft" which is fraud but with a computer.
ke88y 3y ago
> But terrible, banal things will be done at the behest of these systems and nobody is talking about it. Well said. Fewer Terminator and War Games fantasies, more boring risk analyses. Amen.
Sniffnoy 3y ago
Plenty of people have been talking about that, from my memory?
- throwway120385 3y ago
  Every time it comes up on the news it's some MIT doctor or VC telling us about how AI is going to replace us or try to take over the world.
  - ke88y 3y ago
    "Nothing to see in this inconsequential corner of the world I'm busy monetizing with who knows what side-effects; you really ought to worry about the Killer AI Robots instead!" Again, I think ego is probably a better explanation than nefarious intent, but it's a nice side-effect.
  - Sniffnoy 3y ago
    I mean I guess the basic response here is that this is because the environment you pay attention to and consider noteworthy is the news, which is different from the environment I pay attention to and consider noteworthy. I feel like these old Slate Star Codex posts are relevant here: https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/05/18/against-bravery-debates/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/05/18/against-bravery-debate... https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/06/09/all-debates-are-bravery-debates/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/06/09/all-debates-are-braver...
    - throwway120385 3y ago
      I don't really think this is a "bravery debate" as defined in that article. And I do think a lot of people who might not read HN or be involved in online discussions get their information from "the news." So I do think it's relevant that they're couching things in terms of fears about sentient AI rather than pointing out how flawed algorithmic systems are already causing damage to people.
      - Sniffnoy 3y ago
patrec 3y ago
> We are about to enter a couple of decades of people using these pithy model systems to make real decisions that impact lots of people, If we're extraordinarily lucky. If not, you can take comfort in that fact that redlining won't survive us either.

mnky9800n 3y ago

As well as these models will all be used to launder content. In the near future you will likely be able to ask an AI to create the next 15 sequels to the movie war games starring a young matthew broderick. Episode 12 will have a karate kid cross over. But how much of what is there will be an actually new thing? How much will be scraped from my War Games fan fic website that contains scripts of 27 sequels to War Games?

TedDoesntTalk 3y ago
Here is ChatGPT 4’s summary of a sequel. I don’t think it’s very good. Maybe another AI would enjoy it though. > Create a summary of a sequel to the movie “War Games” Title: "War Games: Firewall" In "War Games: Firewall", now-adult computer genius David Lightman (Matthew Broderick) has been working as a cyber security consultant for the Pentagon. When an advanced, multi-national cyber-terrorist organization emerges, they launch an unprecedented global cyber attack, disabling most nations' defensive and civil infrastructure. The terrorists reveal their ultimate goal: to dismantle the world order and plunge civilization into chaos. When the attacks render modern cybersecurity methods useless, the Pentagon calls upon Lightman. Using a blend of cutting-edge and old-school methods, including reactivating the dormant WOPR (War Operation Plan Response) system, also known as "Joshua," Lightman and a team of young coders race against time to decode the terrorists' inscrutable and constantly evolving virus. However, the situation takes a dire turn when Joshua, still possessing the capability to initiate global thermonuclear war, starts interpreting the cyber attack as an actual war, threatening to launch nuclear missiles once again. Lightman must not only outsmart the terrorists but also reason with Joshua, triggering a game of chess where each move could save or destroy the world. The climax culminates with Lightman teaching Joshua an updated lesson about the futility of war in a digital age, thus averting global disaster and unmasking the villains. In a world increasingly reliant on technology, "War Games: Firewall" underlines the importance of human judgment and intervention.
- ballenf 3y ago
  That sounds better than every recent sequel coming out of Hollywood, imho. Would watch.
  - ke88y 3y ago
    And better than the actual WarGames sequel.
  - mnky9800n 3y ago
    It's very 2005. It's surprising this movie wasn't made.
- wrp 3y ago
  I feel this example points to a key issue regarding LLM AI. I've read the work on AI story generation from early days to now, and GPT-4's output shows a jump in performance that leaves me both elated and dismayed. The fluency and coherence of the generated narrative is incredible, frankly better than most student writing. On the other hand, I get an overwhelming sense of banality. Looking back on historical speculation about AI, I think there was always a tacit assumption that facility for communication would develop on top of facility for incisive reasoning. Fluency without insight was not expected.
  - TedDoesntTalk 3y ago
    You didn’t mention creativity (or lack of it). Is it ironic that the overall lesson is “human judgment and intervention” are important, or maybe it just lifted that from the original movie.
    - DropInIn 3y ago
      People ascribe way too much non-programatic nature to humans imo Just look up the Name a Color and a Tool question Did you think of one? Red hammer? Or blue screwdriver?
      - 3y ago
Borrible 3y ago
Like the Star Wars franchise?

cycomanic 3y ago

"little Britain" (if you don't know it go look it up you're in for a treat), knew it already: "the computer says no".

jasonwatkinspdx 3y ago

A very glaring example of this problem is sentencing guideline software that uses ML to suggest sentences to judges. Anyone familiar with the very basics of ML as a practitioner knows this is a terrible idea, very likely to reproduce any biases or bigotry in the training dataset, but the courts are increasingly treating them like blind just oracles. This is going to go very bad places imo. The risk isn't some sort of rogue smarter than humans AI, it's humans using AI to do the same stupid evils in a deniable or even unknown way.

throwway120385 3y ago
The worst part is we have learned zero lessons from the metamorphosis of "fraud" into "identity theft." In the former case, the banks were responsible for preventing "fraud" and when that became too easy they simply abdicated all responsibility for this new form of computerized fraud and created the notion of "identity theft" which is fraud but with a computer.

ke88y 3y ago

> But terrible, banal things will be done at the behest of these systems and nobody is talking about it. Well said. Fewer Terminator and War Games fantasies, more boring risk analyses. Amen.

Sniffnoy 3y ago

Plenty of people have been talking about that, from my memory?

throwway120385 3y ago
Every time it comes up on the news it's some MIT doctor or VC telling us about how AI is going to replace us or try to take over the world.
- ke88y 3y ago
  "Nothing to see in this inconsequential corner of the world I'm busy monetizing with who knows what side-effects; you really ought to worry about the Killer AI Robots instead!" Again, I think ego is probably a better explanation than nefarious intent, but it's a nice side-effect.
- Sniffnoy 3y ago
  I mean I guess the basic response here is that this is because the environment you pay attention to and consider noteworthy is the news, which is different from the environment I pay attention to and consider noteworthy. I feel like these old Slate Star Codex posts are relevant here: https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/05/18/against-bravery-debates/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/05/18/against-bravery-debate... https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/06/09/all-debates-are-bravery-debates/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/06/09/all-debates-are-braver...
  - throwway120385 3y ago
    I don't really think this is a "bravery debate" as defined in that article. And I do think a lot of people who might not read HN or be involved in online discussions get their information from "the news." So I do think it's relevant that they're couching things in terms of fears about sentient AI rather than pointing out how flawed algorithmic systems are already causing damage to people.
    - Sniffnoy 3y ago

patrec 3y ago

> We are about to enter a couple of decades of people using these pithy model systems to make real decisions that impact lots of people, If we're extraordinarily lucky. If not, you can take comfort in that fact that redlining won't survive us either.