7 ms·

The easiest way to grow AI resistance is to get Dario Amodei and Sam Altman on TV and let them talk.

by lolcatzlulz 6mo ago

FeteCommuniste 6mo ago
Get Alex Karp out there promoting autonomous weapons, too, if you want the ultimate trifecta.
- DoctorOetker 6mo ago
  [dead]
xpe 6mo ago
> The easiest way to grow AI resistance is to get Dario Amodei and Sam Altman on TV and let them talk. Tell me more? I'm guessing you might say: neither connects with everyday people, they have misaligned incentives*, they (like most corporate leaders) don't speak directly, they have more power than almost any elected leader in the world, ... Did I miss anything? My take: when it comes to character and goals and therefore predicting what they will do: please don't lump Amodei with Altman. In brief: Altman is polished, effective, and therefore rather unsettling. In short, Altman feels amoral. It feels like people follow him rather than his ideas. Amodei is different. He inspires by his character and ideals. Amodei is a well-meaning geek, and I sometimes marvel (in a good way) how he leads a top AI lab. His media chops are middling and awkward, but frankly, I'm ok with it. I get the sense he is communicating (more-or-less) as himself. Let me know if anyone here has evidence to suggest any claim I'm making is off-base. I'm no oracle. I could easily pile on more criticisms of both. Here's a few: to my eye, Dario doesn't go far enough with his concerns about AI futures, but I can't tell how much of this is his PR stance as head of A\ versus his core beliefs. Altman is a harder nut to crack: my first approximation of him is "brilliant, capable, and manipulative". As much as I worry about OpenAI and dislike Altman's power-grab, I probably grant that he's, like most people, fundamentally trying to do the right thing. I don't think he's quite as deranged as say Thiel. But I could be wrong. If I had that kind of money, intellect, and network, maybe I would also be using it aggressively and in ways that could come across as cunning. Maybe Altman and Thiel have good intentions and decent plans -- but the fact remains the concentration of power is corrupting, and they seem to have limited guardrails given their immense influence. * Here's my claim, and I invite serious debate on it: Dario, more than any corporate leader, takes alignment seriously. He actually funds work on it. He knows how it works. He cares. He actually does some of the work, or at least used to. How many CEOs of the companies they run actually have the skills to DO the rank-and-file work? Even the most pessimistic people probably probably can grant this.
- phainopepla2 6mo ago
  You're overthinking the parent comment, I think. When Dario goes on TV he says things like "AI is going to put 50% of white collar workers out of a job in a few years". The average TV viewer who hears that doesn't know what AI alignment means, they just hear that this guy, whatever his intentions, is threatening their ability to survive in this economy.
  - xpe 6mo ago
    > they just hear that this guy, whatever his intentions, is threatening their ability to survive in this economy. Yep, Dario is straddling this sort of impossible line: he's the least-scary harbinger who is try to be one of the more transparent people to sound the alarm. But the funny thing about saying "don't shoot the messenger" is that it usually gets uttered well after the messenger has taken a bullet. > You're overthinking the parent comment, I think. Luckily, the phrase overthinking is on the way out. We really don't want any more Idiocracy Part II. In this day, we need all the thinking we can get. We often need (1) better thinking and (2) the ability to redirect our thinking towards other directions. In my experience, 2026 is the year where almost all stigma about "talking AI" is out the window. I am nearly at the point where I say whatever I think needs to be said, even if I'm not sure if people will think I be crazy. So if Typical Q. Person asks me, I tell them whatever I think will fit into their brain at the time -- how AI works, why Dario is awkward, why superintelligence is no bueno, etc.
    - phainopepla2 6mo ago
      > But the funny thing about saying "don't shoot the messenger" is that it usually gets uttered well after the messenger has taken a bullet. Dario is not just a messenger, though. In his case it would be more like, "Don't shoot one of the generals in the invading army." To which it would be reasonable to ask, "Why not?" Even if he's the general saying that he wants minimal civilian casualties.
      - xpe 6mo ago
        I get that metaphor. Let's try on another metaphor too, since the goal is insight, not judgment*... This reminds me of economic development policies of China and the USA ... both often pitch a developing country who needs something. Where "something" means i.e. getting out of poverty and/or having fewer people starve. The investor offer certain benefits with strings attached. These benefits are hard to pass up but involve major reforms. Painful reforms. On top of that, one country often says "if you don't work with us, you're stuck with [other country]" and vice versa. Try on this metaphor and see if it sheds some light on the impossible situation Dario is in. * If you are trying to judge Dario, we're not having the same conversation. How many people on earth can grasp even ~1% of the situation he's in? How many have the intellectual tools and ability to reason through it? Maybe 0.1%, tops.

The easiest way to grow AI resistance is to get Dario Amodei and Sam Altman on TV and let them talk.

FeteCommuniste 6mo ago

Get Alex Karp out there promoting autonomous weapons, too, if you want the ultimate trifecta.

DoctorOetker 6mo ago
[dead]

xpe 6mo ago

> The easiest way to grow AI resistance is to get Dario Amodei and Sam Altman on TV and let them talk. Tell me more? I'm guessing you might say: neither connects with everyday people, they have misaligned incentives*, they (like most corporate leaders) don't speak directly, they have more power than almost any elected leader in the world, ... Did I miss anything? My take: when it comes to character and goals and therefore predicting what they will do: please don't lump Amodei with Altman. In brief: Altman is polished, effective, and therefore rather unsettling. In short, Altman feels amoral. It feels like people follow him rather than his ideas. Amodei is different. He inspires by his character and ideals. Amodei is a well-meaning geek, and I sometimes marvel (in a good way) how he leads a top AI lab. His media chops are middling and awkward, but frankly, I'm ok with it. I get the sense he is communicating (more-or-less) as himself. Let me know if anyone here has evidence to suggest any claim I'm making is off-base. I'm no oracle. I could easily pile on more criticisms of both. Here's a few: to my eye, Dario doesn't go far enough with his concerns about AI futures, but I can't tell how much of this is his PR stance as head of A\ versus his core beliefs. Altman is a harder nut to crack: my first approximation of him is "brilliant, capable, and manipulative". As much as I worry about OpenAI and dislike Altman's power-grab, I probably grant that he's, like most people, fundamentally trying to do the right thing. I don't think he's quite as deranged as say Thiel. But I could be wrong. If I had that kind of money, intellect, and network, maybe I would also be using it aggressively and in ways that could come across as cunning. Maybe Altman and Thiel have good intentions and decent plans -- but the fact remains the concentration of power is corrupting, and they seem to have limited guardrails given their immense influence. * Here's my claim, and I invite serious debate on it: Dario, more than any corporate leader, takes alignment seriously. He actually funds work on it. He knows how it works. He cares. He actually does some of the work, or at least used to. How many CEOs of the companies they run actually have the skills to DO the rank-and-file work? Even the most pessimistic people probably probably can grant this.

phainopepla2 6mo ago
You're overthinking the parent comment, I think. When Dario goes on TV he says things like "AI is going to put 50% of white collar workers out of a job in a few years". The average TV viewer who hears that doesn't know what AI alignment means, they just hear that this guy, whatever his intentions, is threatening their ability to survive in this economy.
- xpe 6mo ago
  > they just hear that this guy, whatever his intentions, is threatening their ability to survive in this economy. Yep, Dario is straddling this sort of impossible line: he's the least-scary harbinger who is try to be one of the more transparent people to sound the alarm. But the funny thing about saying "don't shoot the messenger" is that it usually gets uttered well after the messenger has taken a bullet. > You're overthinking the parent comment, I think. Luckily, the phrase overthinking is on the way out. We really don't want any more Idiocracy Part II. In this day, we need all the thinking we can get. We often need (1) better thinking and (2) the ability to redirect our thinking towards other directions. In my experience, 2026 is the year where almost all stigma about "talking AI" is out the window. I am nearly at the point where I say whatever I think needs to be said, even if I'm not sure if people will think I be crazy. So if Typical Q. Person asks me, I tell them whatever I think will fit into their brain at the time -- how AI works, why Dario is awkward, why superintelligence is no bueno, etc.
  - phainopepla2 6mo ago
    > But the funny thing about saying "don't shoot the messenger" is that it usually gets uttered well after the messenger has taken a bullet. Dario is not just a messenger, though. In his case it would be more like, "Don't shoot one of the generals in the invading army." To which it would be reasonable to ask, "Why not?" Even if he's the general saying that he wants minimal civilian casualties.
    - xpe 6mo ago
      I get that metaphor. Let's try on another metaphor too, since the goal is insight, not judgment*... This reminds me of economic development policies of China and the USA ... both often pitch a developing country who needs something. Where "something" means i.e. getting out of poverty and/or having fewer people starve. The investor offer certain benefits with strings attached. These benefits are hard to pass up but involve major reforms. Painful reforms. On top of that, one country often says "if you don't work with us, you're stuck with [other country]" and vice versa. Try on this metaphor and see if it sheds some light on the impossible situation Dario is in. * If you are trying to judge Dario, we're not having the same conversation. How many people on earth can grasp even ~1% of the situation he's in? How many have the intellectual tools and ability to reason through it? Maybe 0.1%, tops.