4 ms·

> seems incredibly naïve and foolish. We have electrical codes. These require disconnects just about everywhere. The notion that any system somehow couldn't

> seems incredibly naïve and foolish. We have electrical codes. These require disconnects just about everywhere. The notion that any system somehow couldn't be "turned off" with or without the consent of the operator is downright laughable. > were the same naysayers Now who's being snide and dismissive? Do you want to argue the point or are you just interested in tossing ad hominem attacks around?

whimsicalism 2y ago
> We have electrical codes. These require disconnects just about everywhere. The notion that any system somehow couldn't be "turned off" with or without the consent of the operator is downright laughable. Not so clear when you are inferencing a distributed model across the globe. Doesn't seem obvious that shutdown of a distributed computing environment will always be trivial. > Now who's being snide and dismissive? Oh to be clear, nothing against being dismissive - just the particular brand of dismissiveness of 'scifi' safety scenarios is naive.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
marshray 2y ago
> The notion that any system somehow couldn't be "turned off" with or without the consent of the operator is downright laughable. Does anyone remember Sen. Lieberman's "Internet Kill Switch" bill?
yarg 2y ago
Someone never watched the Terminator series. In all seriousness, if we ever get to the point where an AI needs to be shut down to avoid catastrophe, there's probably no way to turn it off. There are digital controls for damned near everything, and security is universally disturbingly bad. Whatever you're trying to stop will already have root-kitted your systems (and quite possibly have replicated) by the time you realise that it's even beginning to become a problem. You could only shut it down if there's a choke point accessible without electronic intervention, and you'd need to reach it without electronic intervention, and do so without communicating your intent. Yes, that's all highly highly improbable - but you seem to believe that you can just turn off the Genie, when he's already seen you coming and is having none of it.
- hiatus 2y ago
  > In all seriousness, if we ever get to the point where an AI needs to be shut down to avoid catastrophe, there's probably no way to turn it off. > There are digital controls for damned near everything, and security is universally disturbingly bad. Just unplug the thing.
  - yarg 2y ago
    > You could only shut it down if there's a choke point accessible without electronic intervention, and you'd need to reach it without electronic intervention, and do so without communicating your intent. You'll be dead before you reach the plug.
    - hiatus 2y ago
      Then bomb it. Or did the AI take over the fighter jets too?
      - yarg 2y ago
        > Whatever you're trying to stop will already have root-kitted your systems (and quite possibly have replicated) by the time you realise that it's even beginning to become a problem. There's a good chance that you won't know where it is - if you even did to begin with (which particular AI even went rogue?). > Or did the AI take over the fighter jets too? Dunno - how secure are the systems? But it's almost certainly fucking with the GPS.
theptip 2y ago
If a malicious model exhilarates its weights to a Chinese datacenter, how do you turn that off? How do you turn off Llama-Omega if it turns out that it can be prompt-hacked into a malicious agent?
- tensor 2y ago
  1. If the weights somehow are obtained by a foreign power, you can't do anything, just like every other technology ever. 2. If it turns into a malicious agent you just hit the "off switch", or, more likely just stop the software, like you turn off your word processor.

whimsicalism 2y ago

> We have electrical codes. These require disconnects just about everywhere. The notion that any system somehow couldn't be "turned off" with or without the consent of the operator is downright laughable. Not so clear when you are inferencing a distributed model across the globe. Doesn't seem obvious that shutdown of a distributed computing environment will always be trivial. > Now who's being snide and dismissive? Oh to be clear, nothing against being dismissive - just the particular brand of dismissiveness of 'scifi' safety scenarios is naive.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

marshray 2y ago

> The notion that any system somehow couldn't be "turned off" with or without the consent of the operator is downright laughable. Does anyone remember Sen. Lieberman's "Internet Kill Switch" bill?

yarg 2y ago

Someone never watched the Terminator series. In all seriousness, if we ever get to the point where an AI needs to be shut down to avoid catastrophe, there's probably no way to turn it off. There are digital controls for damned near everything, and security is universally disturbingly bad. Whatever you're trying to stop will already have root-kitted your systems (and quite possibly have replicated) by the time you realise that it's even beginning to become a problem. You could only shut it down if there's a choke point accessible without electronic intervention, and you'd need to reach it without electronic intervention, and do so without communicating your intent. Yes, that's all highly highly improbable - but you seem to believe that you can just turn off the Genie, when he's already seen you coming and is having none of it.

hiatus 2y ago
> In all seriousness, if we ever get to the point where an AI needs to be shut down to avoid catastrophe, there's probably no way to turn it off. > There are digital controls for damned near everything, and security is universally disturbingly bad. Just unplug the thing.
- yarg 2y ago
  > You could only shut it down if there's a choke point accessible without electronic intervention, and you'd need to reach it without electronic intervention, and do so without communicating your intent. You'll be dead before you reach the plug.
  - hiatus 2y ago
    Then bomb it. Or did the AI take over the fighter jets too?
    - yarg 2y ago
      > Whatever you're trying to stop will already have root-kitted your systems (and quite possibly have replicated) by the time you realise that it's even beginning to become a problem. There's a good chance that you won't know where it is - if you even did to begin with (which particular AI even went rogue?). > Or did the AI take over the fighter jets too? Dunno - how secure are the systems? But it's almost certainly fucking with the GPS.

theptip 2y ago

If a malicious model exhilarates its weights to a Chinese datacenter, how do you turn that off? How do you turn off Llama-Omega if it turns out that it can be prompt-hacked into a malicious agent?

tensor 2y ago
1. If the weights somehow are obtained by a foreign power, you can't do anything, just like every other technology ever. 2. If it turns into a malicious agent you just hit the "off switch", or, more likely just stop the software, like you turn off your word processor.