4 ms·
We do actually police dual use things if the other use is deemed dangerous enough. I don't see LLMs as particularly dangerous, so would not put them in that cat
by RandomLensman 3y ago
We do actually police dual use things if the other use is deemed dangerous enough. I don't see LLMs as particularly dangerous, so would not put them in that category.
- pixl97 3y agoLLMs at this point are creeping closer to that edge, at least in the western world. If for example you were the Chinese government you may already see LLMs as highly dangerous to your plans of social stability, hence make a lot of rules now on their policing.
- FiniteField 3y agoI think if anything it's the other way. For the Chinese system and other "traditional authoritarian" regimes in which power flows from the top down fairly straightforwardly, LLMs are just another form of speech that is pretty openly cracked down on. The West's "crown jewel" is its democracy, in which power supposedly flows up from the consensus of the people, and cheap AI bots have the possibility of tipping the scales of consensus. That's the idealistic view anyway. A more cynical one might be that in the West, the flow of power from the top down is obfuscated by filtering it through the media and other institutions, who manufacture public consensus, and LLMs are liable to disrupt this system in a way those in power can't predict right now.