3 ms·

> victory will belong to the savvy blackhat hacker who uses AI to generate code at scale This is just it: AI, while providing some efficiency gains for the ave

> victory will belong to the savvy blackhat hacker who uses AI to generate code at scale This is just it: AI, while providing some efficiency gains for the average user, will become simply too powerful. Imagine a superpower that allows you to move objects with your mind. That could be a very nice thing to have for many to have, because you could probably help people with it. That's the attitude many hacker-types take. The problem is, it allows people to also kill instantly, which means that telekinesis would just be too powerful to juxtapose against our animal instincts. AI is just too powerful – and if more people took a serious stand against it, it might actually be shut down.

rco8786 1y ago
Is it even possible to shut it down?
- vouaobrasil 1y ago
  Of course it is. If enough people were truly enraged by it, if some leader were to rile up the mob enough, it could be shut down. Revolts have occurred in other parts of the world, and things are getting sufficiently bad that a sizable enough revolt could shut AI down. All we need is a sufficient number of people who are angry enough at AI.
  - sgjohnson 1y ago
    Good luck shutting down the LLM running on my MacBook. The Pandora’s Box is open. It’s over.
    - blibble 1y ago
      a software update could easily cripple its ability to run on your local machine unless you plan to never update again
      - diggan 1y ago
        > a software update could easily cripple its ability to run on your local machine A software update collaborated on by Microsoft, Apple + countless of volunteer groups managing various other distributions? The cat really is out of the bag. You could probably make it a death penalty in the whole world and some people would still use it secretly. Once things like this run on consumer hardware, I think it's already too late to pull it down fully. You could regulate it though and probably have a better chance of limiting the damages, not sure an outright ban could even have the effect you want with a ban.
        blibble 1y ago
        the nvidia/AMD/apple chips all require proprietary firmware blobs, it can be enforced in there yes you won't get people that won't ever update, but you'll get the overwhelming majority and the hardware the never-updaters use will eventually fail and won't be able to be replaced also: ban the release of new "open" models, they will slowly become out of date and useless combine these, and the problem will solve itself over time
        diggan 1y ago
        > they will slowly become out of date and useless Models released today are already useful for a bunch of stuff, maybe over the course of 100 year they could be considered "out of date", but they don't exactly bitrot by themselves because they sit on a disk, not sure why'd they suddenly "expire" or whatever you try to hint at. And even over the course of 100 year, people will continue the machine learning science, regardless if it's legal or not, the potential benefits (for a select few) seems to be too good for people to ignore, which is why the current bubble is happening in the first place.
        blibble 1y ago
        your hardware won't last 100 years > And even over the course of 100 year, people will continue the machine learning science the weak point is big tech: without their massive spending the entire ecosystem will collapse so that's what we target, politically, legally, technologically and regulatory we (humanity) only need to succeed in one of these domains once, then their business model becomes nonviable once you cut off the snake's head, the body will die the boosters in search of a quick buck will then move onto the next thing (probably "quantum")
    - vouaobrasil 1y ago
      Plenty of past civilizations have thought they were invulnerable. In fact, most entities with power think that they can never be taken down. But countless empires in the past have fallen, and countless powerful people have lost their wealth and power overnight.
      - svachalek 1y ago
        There's a big difference between a civilization being taken down, and civilization being taken down.
  - rco8786 1y ago
    But it's just like, math. The math is out there now. You can't shut down math.
- rglover 1y ago
  It's just software running on a server...this isn't a Johnny Depp movie [1]. Just flip the power switch on the racks. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jg3mSf561w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jg3mSf561w
  - hluska 1y ago
    Rather, it’s many different types of software running on many different systems around the world, each funded by a different party with its own motives. This is no movie…
    - vouaobrasil 1y ago
      True, but the system only exists because it is currently economically viable. A mass taboo against AI would change that. And many people outside of tech already dislike AI a lot, so it's not inconceivable that this dislike could be fuelled into a worldwide taboo.
      - diggan 1y ago
        > True, but the system only exists because it is currently economically viable. The "system" isn't a thing, but more like running apps, some run on servers, other consumer hardware. And the parts that run on consumer hardware will be around even if 99% of the current hyped up ecosystem dies overnight, people won't suddenly stop trying to run these things locally.
    - rglover 1y ago
      And every single one has a power switch. I get the general "too many variables" argument, but the idea that humans have no means of stopping any of these apps/systems/algorithms/etc if they get "out of control" (a farce in itself as it's a chat bot) is ridiculous. It's very interesting to see how badly people want to be living in and being an active participant in a sci-fi flick. I think that's far more concerning than the AI itself.
      - vouaobrasil 1y ago

rco8786 1y ago

Is it even possible to shut it down?

vouaobrasil 1y ago
Of course it is. If enough people were truly enraged by it, if some leader were to rile up the mob enough, it could be shut down. Revolts have occurred in other parts of the world, and things are getting sufficiently bad that a sizable enough revolt could shut AI down. All we need is a sufficient number of people who are angry enough at AI.
- sgjohnson 1y ago
  Good luck shutting down the LLM running on my MacBook. The Pandora’s Box is open. It’s over.
  - blibble 1y ago
    a software update could easily cripple its ability to run on your local machine unless you plan to never update again
    - diggan 1y ago
      > a software update could easily cripple its ability to run on your local machine A software update collaborated on by Microsoft, Apple + countless of volunteer groups managing various other distributions? The cat really is out of the bag. You could probably make it a death penalty in the whole world and some people would still use it secretly. Once things like this run on consumer hardware, I think it's already too late to pull it down fully. You could regulate it though and probably have a better chance of limiting the damages, not sure an outright ban could even have the effect you want with a ban.
      - blibble 1y ago
        the nvidia/AMD/apple chips all require proprietary firmware blobs, it can be enforced in there yes you won't get people that won't ever update, but you'll get the overwhelming majority and the hardware the never-updaters use will eventually fail and won't be able to be replaced also: ban the release of new "open" models, they will slowly become out of date and useless combine these, and the problem will solve itself over time
        diggan 1y ago
        > they will slowly become out of date and useless Models released today are already useful for a bunch of stuff, maybe over the course of 100 year they could be considered "out of date", but they don't exactly bitrot by themselves because they sit on a disk, not sure why'd they suddenly "expire" or whatever you try to hint at. And even over the course of 100 year, people will continue the machine learning science, regardless if it's legal or not, the potential benefits (for a select few) seems to be too good for people to ignore, which is why the current bubble is happening in the first place.
        blibble 1y ago
        your hardware won't last 100 years > And even over the course of 100 year, people will continue the machine learning science the weak point is big tech: without their massive spending the entire ecosystem will collapse so that's what we target, politically, legally, technologically and regulatory we (humanity) only need to succeed in one of these domains once, then their business model becomes nonviable once you cut off the snake's head, the body will die the boosters in search of a quick buck will then move onto the next thing (probably "quantum")
  - vouaobrasil 1y ago
    Plenty of past civilizations have thought they were invulnerable. In fact, most entities with power think that they can never be taken down. But countless empires in the past have fallen, and countless powerful people have lost their wealth and power overnight.
    - svachalek 1y ago
      There's a big difference between a civilization being taken down, and civilization being taken down.
- rco8786 1y ago
  But it's just like, math. The math is out there now. You can't shut down math.
rglover 1y ago
It's just software running on a server...this isn't a Johnny Depp movie [1]. Just flip the power switch on the racks. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jg3mSf561w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jg3mSf561w
- hluska 1y ago
  Rather, it’s many different types of software running on many different systems around the world, each funded by a different party with its own motives. This is no movie…
  - vouaobrasil 1y ago
    True, but the system only exists because it is currently economically viable. A mass taboo against AI would change that. And many people outside of tech already dislike AI a lot, so it's not inconceivable that this dislike could be fuelled into a worldwide taboo.
    - diggan 1y ago
      > True, but the system only exists because it is currently economically viable. The "system" isn't a thing, but more like running apps, some run on servers, other consumer hardware. And the parts that run on consumer hardware will be around even if 99% of the current hyped up ecosystem dies overnight, people won't suddenly stop trying to run these things locally.
  - rglover 1y ago
    And every single one has a power switch. I get the general "too many variables" argument, but the idea that humans have no means of stopping any of these apps/systems/algorithms/etc if they get "out of control" (a farce in itself as it's a chat bot) is ridiculous. It's very interesting to see how badly people want to be living in and being an active participant in a sci-fi flick. I think that's far more concerning than the AI itself.
    - vouaobrasil 1y ago