3 ms·

AI safety is huge grift, worse than NFTs. Just pull the plug if it gets out of control lmao

ben_w 2y ago
2000-2020: "How could an AI escape from its server, just say no." 2023: "Why isn't this AI research company that says the models are potentially dangerous in the wrong hands, not letting me download the models?" OpenAI can switch it off… in theory. In theory, the Soviet Union could have "just switched off" Chrenobyl. In practice, the emergency off button made it explode, and other reactors on the same site had incidents both 5 years before and 5 years after the famous one. None of the downloadable models can be "switched off" remotely, any more than we can force people to stop using buggy software. And you would need to have that capability — was it called EvilGPT or ChaosGPT, the one explicitly tasked with trying to destroy the world? Because people absolutely will keep pushing that particular button until it actually works: some because, like you, they don't believe it ever will and wish to mock the idea; others because they are actively misanthropic.
- swores 2y ago
  Also, given robotics is also advancing fast, anything that relies on our being in complete control of the physical world (including physical access to on/off buttons and to things like power plants & energy grids) potentially goes out the window once both sides of the equation - robotics for execution and AI for control - have progressed enough that combined they can form an army capable of overpowering well-armed humans (unless the humans have a huge financial advantage / can be well armed enough to beat relatively weaker robots). I don't think it's something that's bound to happen, but I do think it's a real concern - and I'm not personally worried about an I, Robot or Matrix scenario where AI decides to take control of humans for whatever reason, but by the idea of it becoming easier for a small number of immoral people to control vast power without having to persuade armed people to do what they want. For example if the AI / robotics arms race sees one major military power take a significant enough lead, it could see them become temporarily invincible (if it includes AI-based missile defence which allows them to secure the entire country's skies without needing millions of people to do so) and they might decide to attack others to try to keep it that way. If, before any other country had caught up enough, the leading country were to have either a single dictator, or a political party in power, who wants to act like the empire builders of several centuries ago did... maybe what hasn't been possible for many years now might become possible again, and we could see a country like the US or China decide it would be better if the whole world were controlled by them, and any country that didn't volunteer to become a state under their power would be forced into occupation by swarms of AI-controlled fighter drones. Without needing to accuse any countries of currently being run by people who would choose to colonise the world if they had the choice, it's clearly not unprecedented for people to make that choice even when knowing it would cause many deaths on both sides - this time it might be almost entirely limited to deaths on the other side, and potentially even not many of those if everyone learns quickly that there's no point resisting against the invincible robot army?

2000-2020: "How could an AI escape from its server, just say no." 2023: "Why isn't this AI research company that says the models are potentially dangerous in the wrong hands, not letting me download the models?" OpenAI can switch it off… in theory. In theory, the Soviet Union could have "just switched off" Chrenobyl. In practice, the emergency off button made it explode, and other reactors on the same site had incidents both 5 years before and 5 years after the famous one. None of the downloadable models can be "switched off" remotely, any more than we can force people to stop using buggy software. And you would need to have that capability — was it called EvilGPT or ChaosGPT, the one explicitly tasked with trying to destroy the world? Because people absolutely will keep pushing that particular button until it actually works: some because, like you, they don't believe it ever will and wish to mock the idea; others because they are actively misanthropic.

swores 2y ago
Also, given robotics is also advancing fast, anything that relies on our being in complete control of the physical world (including physical access to on/off buttons and to things like power plants & energy grids) potentially goes out the window once both sides of the equation - robotics for execution and AI for control - have progressed enough that combined they can form an army capable of overpowering well-armed humans (unless the humans have a huge financial advantage / can be well armed enough to beat relatively weaker robots). I don't think it's something that's bound to happen, but I do think it's a real concern - and I'm not personally worried about an I, Robot or Matrix scenario where AI decides to take control of humans for whatever reason, but by the idea of it becoming easier for a small number of immoral people to control vast power without having to persuade armed people to do what they want. For example if the AI / robotics arms race sees one major military power take a significant enough lead, it could see them become temporarily invincible (if it includes AI-based missile defence which allows them to secure the entire country's skies without needing millions of people to do so) and they might decide to attack others to try to keep it that way. If, before any other country had caught up enough, the leading country were to have either a single dictator, or a political party in power, who wants to act like the empire builders of several centuries ago did... maybe what hasn't been possible for many years now might become possible again, and we could see a country like the US or China decide it would be better if the whole world were controlled by them, and any country that didn't volunteer to become a state under their power would be forced into occupation by swarms of AI-controlled fighter drones. Without needing to accuse any countries of currently being run by people who would choose to colonise the world if they had the choice, it's clearly not unprecedented for people to make that choice even when knowing it would cause many deaths on both sides - this time it might be almost entirely limited to deaths on the other side, and potentially even not many of those if everyone learns quickly that there's no point resisting against the invincible robot army?