7 ms·
Yeah, if I talk to a 'normie' and explain that chatGPT and OpenAI are nefariously plotting regulatory capture most will roll their eyes at me. If I say "The fo
by boppo1 3y ago
Yeah, if I talk to a 'normie' and explain that chatGPT and OpenAI are nefariously plotting regulatory capture most will roll their eyes at me.
If I say "The founder of OpenAI is scanning people's eyeballs to build a database" that sets off real alarm bells.
- tim333 3y agoYeah but "scanning people's eyeballs to build a database" is untrue. You can scare a lot of people by telling them untrue stuff.
- reaperducer 3y agoYeah but "scanning people's eyeballs to build a database" is untrue. That is literally what he is doing. People walk up to an "orb," get their eyeballs scanned, and a unique key goes into a database. What part of the parent's statement is untrue?
- tim333 3y agoThe purpose is to build a financial system although data is involved. It's a bit like saying banking is a scheme to get your financial data. I mean banks have your data but it's not the purpose.
- redox99 3y agoPretty sad. They don't care about regulation that would potentially have a profound impact for everybody, but they care about people voluntarily doing something for a silly crypto token?
- scrps 3y agoI would hope both would set off alarm bells but I guess at least one of them inducing trepidation is cause enough these days for guarded optimism.
- flangola7 3y agoThe regulatory capture conspiracy is myopic, ignorant, and "cope" as the kids say these days. People act as if Altman had never said spoken about AI dangers until ChatGPT took off, when in reality Altman has written about the dangers of AI before OpenAI even existed. The US government already added GPU dual-use export control restrictions a year ago due to their potential for weaponization, so he is not alone in recognizing the inherent dangers.
- kbenson 3y agoOne of them is easy to include in thrilling action movies that allows the idea and risk to enter public consciousness, and the other is something that economics wonks and people interested in how business works at high levels look at. Protagonist 1: "I don't get it, why are they doing this? What do they have to gain?" Protagonist 2: "I don't know, unless... oh my god, it's regulatory capture!" Protagonist 1: "Shit, of course! What will we do?" Audience: Laughs at this shit being played so straight it comes off as a farce.
- FormerBandmate 3y agoRegulatory capture becomes much easier to understand when you exaggerate it and say they’re trying to hijack and take over the government to make money. It isn’t that, but it’s close enough
- Terr_ 3y ago"I bear urgent news! The king is planning to destroy the margrave, not by force of arms but by monopolizing the right of seigniorage!"
- AnthonyMouse 3y agoThe problem with regulatory capture is it makes everybody look bad. The usual morality play is either the evil business hurting people who has to be stopped by the benevolent government regulators, or the evil government regulators hurting innocent businesses who are just trying to make a living and keep prices down and keep jobs from moving offshore. To which the traditional solutions are either more regulations that businesses don't like or fewer regulations that businesses don't like. Regulatory capture is when the villains of both sides are working together, and the solution to it is fewer regulations that big businesses do like. But nobody wants to see their hero as a villain so anything that accurately portrays this is unpopular.
- catchnear4321 3y agoyou forgot the part about the shiny metal orb. it really changes the flavor of it from cambridge analytica to dr evil.
- rchaud 3y agoI'm starting to think Bond villains need to have a "satire" disclaimer to pre-empt future Stanford kids from thinking it's something to aspire to.
- redler 3y agoThey'll still have Atlas Shrugged.
- Hamuko 3y agoAlternative subtitle track that just displays "(this guy is the bad guy)" when the villain is visible on screen.
- mrguyorama 3y agoHow can he be the villain, he has all the money so he must be the good guy!
- rchaud 3y agoPerhaps a health bar that depletes as the good guy chips away at his evil plans?
- dragonwriter 3y ago> Yeah, if I talk to a 'normie' and explain that chatGPT and OpenAI are nefariously plotting regulatory capture most will roll their eyes at me. You are supposed to preface it with how Altman is making AI services, selling them as AGI, and also painting AGI as a danger to the survival of humanity. Then, when they are baffled at why someone would sell something while describing it that way, you can walk them through regulatory capture and erecting barriers to competition.
- shwaj 3y agoCitation requested re: Altman saying current offerings are AGI. When I search, I see things like “there may be a path to AGI”.
- mcpar-land 3y agothe current 'normie' understanding of ChatGPT and other current LLMs like Bard is not that they are stochastic parrots that can complete sentences by probabilities, it's that they are 'stupid AGI.' And if we give them more funding and more training, eventually they will become 'smart AGI.' OpenAI markets their product exactly this way, focusing on how ChatGPT can 'write code' (it cannot) or 'write poetry' (it cannot) or do any number of things that lean in hard on the 'stupid AGI' angle, never clarifying that their actual product is a spicy autocomplete. You'll never hear OpenAI say 'ChatGPT is a stupid AGI' out loud, but they'll never correct any mainstream misunderstandings that it is.