5 ms·

I 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.

by scrps 3y ago

flangola7 3y ago
The 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 ago
One 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 ago
  Regulatory 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 ago
  The 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.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > The problem with regulatory capture is it makes everybody look bad The other problem is this isn't how regulatory capture happens. OpenAI was flexing its badass credentials in the halls of Congress while it wrapped up a multibillion-dollar fundraise. There was no path from Altman's testimony to any sort of regulatory apparatus that wouldn't immediately constrain him.
    - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
      Isn't the usual theory for this that they're pulling up the ladder? They get billions in funding which they can use to absorb regulatory overhead, then the regulations come which price out early stage competitors and make it harder for anyone else to raise the kind of funding they've already secured.
      - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
        > Isn't the usual theory for this that they're pulling up the ladder? Actual capture involves industry coöpting existing regulators through revolving doors and burdensome rules that reduce the threat of new entrants. It happens quietly. The only times industry proposes new frameworks in public is when they're cornered. The "regulatory capture" playbook OpenAI purported to follow has zero actual precedent. It is only rhetorically precedented in crypto, where the same nonsense about creating a new regulator that would simultaneously be less-burdensome than the status quo yet also cement incumbents' advantages was pitched to the naïve.

I 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.

by scrps 3y ago

I 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 ago

The 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 ago

One 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 ago
Regulatory 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 ago
The 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.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > The problem with regulatory capture is it makes everybody look bad The other problem is this isn't how regulatory capture happens. OpenAI was flexing its badass credentials in the halls of Congress while it wrapped up a multibillion-dollar fundraise. There was no path from Altman's testimony to any sort of regulatory apparatus that wouldn't immediately constrain him.
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    Isn't the usual theory for this that they're pulling up the ladder? They get billions in funding which they can use to absorb regulatory overhead, then the regulations come which price out early stage competitors and make it harder for anyone else to raise the kind of funding they've already secured.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > Isn't the usual theory for this that they're pulling up the ladder? Actual capture involves industry coöpting existing regulators through revolving doors and burdensome rules that reduce the threat of new entrants. It happens quietly. The only times industry proposes new frameworks in public is when they're cornered. The "regulatory capture" playbook OpenAI purported to follow has zero actual precedent. It is only rhetorically precedented in crypto, where the same nonsense about creating a new regulator that would simultaneously be less-burdensome than the status quo yet also cement incumbents' advantages was pitched to the naïve.