5 ms·
But is there a real AI-threat, that would need real AI-safety? To me it still looks like a nice bar-trick, not AI. It is very clever, very nice, even astoundin
by not_your_vase 3y ago
But is there a real AI-threat, that would need real AI-safety?
To me it still looks like a nice bar-trick, not AI. It is very clever, very nice, even astounding. But doesn't look threatening - at some cases it is even dumb. The fear-mongering looks more like scare-marketing. Which is also clever, in my opinion.
But maybe I'm just out of touch.
- temp0826 3y agoThe only threat is automated blogspam creation. LLMs are not AI (not even close), only marketed as such.
- qqqwerty 3y agoWe went through the same thing with self-driving cars. All the talking heads were crowing about how many jobs were going to get eliminated soon and we needed to prepare society for the ramifications. About a decade into it and they are just starting to roll out self-driving taxis in very limited controlled fashion. And the loss of jobs that everyone was worried about is easily another decade away (if at all). LLMs are cool and useful. So is self-driving tech. But the fear mongering is a bit premature. Folks seem to have bought in to the singularity style AGI event, but reality is AGI if possible is going to be a long slow incremental process.
- pempem 3y agoDecades do actually pass however and worker protections also take decades to fight for, and put in place. In fact sometimes they take generations. I agree with you about the fear mongering. I also just don't know where all this kind of not very accurate but very reassuring presentation of information will go and how it will sway others
- richk449 3y ago> But the fear mongering is a bit premature. I’m sure you would also accept that at some point it could become too late to start worrying about the risks if the danger has already gone exponential. So how do you determine when is the right time to worry? If you have to error on worrying too early or two late, which way do you bias your decision?
- wardedVibe 3y agoIt was a fire drill for AGI, and one that was failed badly.
- oxfordmale 3y agoThe current models are static, they do not get modified by self learning. Unless someone already build in a Skynet backdoor, we are safe. ...and I am hoping all nuclear missiles are air gapped anyway...
- gnaritas99 3y ago[dead]
- gala8y 3y ago> ...and I am hoping all nuclear missiles are air gapped anyway... These are running on hardware from 50's. We can sleep softly.
- AdamJacobMuller 3y agoIt doesn't matter if the missiles are air-gapped. AI doesn't need to connect to the missiles and fire them directly, AI can just manipulate the media (conventional, social, all of it) on both sides to engineer a situation in which we would enter a nuclear war.
- js8 3y ago> just manipulate the media (conventional, social, all of it) on both sides to engineer a situation in which we would enter a nuclear war Good luck with that. Remember how it ended the last time this was tried, with.. peace talks. If you really want a global thermonuclear war, humans are completely useless. You have to take the matter into your own hands.
- AdamJacobMuller 3y ago> Remember how it ended the last time this was tried What event are you talking about?
- HDThoreaun 3y agoMost of the ai safety arguments revolve around “once it’s powerful enough to cause damage it’ll be too late to come up with a strategy”. If you accept that it doesn’t matter that ai systems now suck, since we don’t know when they’ll improve.
- insanitybit 3y agoWhat damage will it cause? I feel like there's "AI will replace jobs" level of damage, which, why would we regulate that? An insane amount of technology is developed with the purpose of improving productivity or outright replacing workers. Then there's the "AI will go rogue", which I don't think is substantiated at all. Like, one can theorize about some novel, distinct system that is able to interact with the external world and becomes "evil", but that seems way, way beyond the helpful word-spitter-outers of today. Then maybe there's "how do we handle deepfakes", or whatever, but... idk, is that it? Is that the thing we want to slow down for?
- HDThoreaun 3y agoImo the worst case scenario is probably an AGI developed by a bad actor who uses it to take over the world. Agreed that rogue ai doesn’t seem super likely, but a rogue person with access to agi does not.
- nradov 3y agoHelp us out here. Let's say that known bad actor Vladimir Putin gets an AGI. How does that allow him to take over the world despite many other countries having nuclear weapons? Take us through it step by step, and no hand waving please.
- dota_fanatic 3y agoOne cannot predict what a smarter-than-themself agent will do ahead of time, if they could then they’re just as smart. Just as a dolphin cannot predict how a human will come up with novel and utterly overwhelming ways to farm them, you and this other poster cannot predict how an AGI will achieve dominance of its environment to achieve its goals, so your request is impossible to fulfill. Lee Sedol couldn’t “take us through it step by step” how AlphaGo would beat him in Go. That aside, afaik most safety concerns arent around a bad human actor using AGI to dominate the planet, it’s around an AGI being misaligned to begin with, it cannot be controlled, we promptly lose everything after it manifests.
- adrians1 3y agoEven if AI is a threat, it's impossible to predict today how the threat is going to look in the future. The "AI safety" crowd watched too many Terminator movies. We'll deal with AI the same way humans dealt with any other technology: gradually, as it gets better and better, discovering at each step what it's capable of.
- pixl97 3y agoRight just like dinosaurs dealt with gradual meteors igniting the atmosphere.
- bobba27 3y agoTo me, a cynical old man, the threat sounds that "it might say something politically incorrect or that I disagree with". That is what I understand the threat is, not a robot uprising a-la Terminator.