4 ms·

Really sick of this stupid narrative. The most ethical goal of an AI lab or government should be to bring the maximum amount of intelligence for as cheap as po

• lovich 4mo ago
  Prefacing that I assume this order is done with ill intent, and would guess that it’s based on Anthropic not bending the knee immediately like OpenAI did. But your statement could be rephrased as > The most ethical goal of a weapons manufacturer or government should be to bring the maximum number of nuclear weapons for as cheap as possible to the people equally. Making sure everyone is a strapped as possible only makes sense to the type of libertarians who salivate at the idea of shooting someone who steps on their property to deliver a letter
  • TIPSIO 4mo ago
    This is obviously a super corny / silly / dramatic thing to say.
    • lovich 4mo ago
      What I said or what you said? If it’s the latter then I missed the joke. If it’s the former I think you’re incorrect.
• procone 4mo ago
  Agreed 100%. I don't understand why we have to fear access to knowledge.
• ajyoon 4mo ago
  AI is dual use technology. This kind of posture is simply not tenable as frontier intelligence increases.
  • chatmasta 4mo ago
    So are guns, which we constitutionally protected. In fact there’s probably a decent argument that AI should fall under 2nd amendment protection.
    • ern 4mo ago
      Don’t legally serious second Amendment supporters regard “arms” as things that can be carried, and are evolved from/analogous to their 18th century hand-carried guns? It would be hard to classify AI (or tanks, artillery, missiles, aircraft) as “arms” that can be “borne” in that sense.
    • ajyoon 4mo ago
      Is your legal theory that any technology which is dangerous should be protected under the second amendment, simply because it is dangerous?
      • chatmasta 4mo ago
        No, my legal theory is that you cannot simultaneously compare technology to a weapon and also say it falls outside the bounds of the 2nd amendment.
        • ajyoon 4mo ago
          Dual use does not mean weapon. And even then, it is simply not the case that all weapons fall under the second amendment.
        • asadotzler 4mo ago
          a tactical nuke is a weapon to which the second amendment has no applicability
    • SilverElfin 4mo ago
      It certainly falls under 1st amendment protection since LLMs are about accessing speech. But that hasn’t stopped Dario from trying hard to push for regulations and bans that limit our civil rights. He and Sam Altman want regulatory capture at the expense of our right to free speech.
• victor9000 4mo ago
  This is precisely the issue. It took a fair amount of idealism, conviction, and commitment in order to create the open source movement and bring it to where it is today. In contrast, most skilled data science practitioners are just chasing IPO exits these days.