3 ms·

Quoting my comment that you replied to and directly ignored: > (Note, because some people misinterpret statements like this: I said "shouldn't exist for anyone

Quoting my comment that you replied to and directly ignored: > (Note, because some people misinterpret statements like this: I said "shouldn't exist for anyone", not "shouldn't exist except for some people".) That means "shouldn't exist for governments" too.

matheusmoreira 3mo ago
Too late for that. It already exists. There is no way to unexist it. As such, any attempts to limit civilian use of this technology will directly lead to corporate and government oppression powered by this technology.
- JoshTriplett 3mo ago
  1) We can prevent larger models from being made. 2) We can treat them the way we treat uranium refining operations: too dangerous to be allowed to exist.
  - matheusmoreira 3mo ago
    > We can prevent larger models from being made. Do that and I guarantee some CIA goons will make the larger models in some black site either way. We're not "preventing" anything. We're in a full on arms race, and unlike nukes, powerful AI models are a strategic capability at the individual level. Everybody's got a stake in this. Anyone who ignores this stuff is probably not gonna make it. > We can treat them the way we treat uranium refining operations: too dangerous to be allowed to exist. Too dangerous to be done by anyone other than the government and their "trusted" corporations, you mean.
    - JoshTriplett 3mo ago
      > Too dangerous to be done by anyone other than the government and their "trusted" corporations, you mean. Seriously, try reading my comments rather than assuming what they say: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49077577 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49077577
      - matheusmoreira 3mo ago
        I read them just fine. I was trying to interpret them charitably. You're contradicting yourself. You just claimed we all collectively treat uranium refinement operations as too dangerous to exist. Not only do they exist, they are regulated by governments so that only trusted people are allowed to do it.
        JoshTriplett 3mo ago
        Which is not quite as good as "doesn't exist", but better than "widely done around the world". And it's been successfully kept from being used for more than eight decades. For AI we need to do better than that, but that's a bare-minimum demonstration that we can recognize the problem of such technologies and do something about it.
  - barnabee 3mo ago
    Without international agreement and cooperation, which is not happening, we can’t

matheusmoreira 3mo ago

Too late for that. It already exists. There is no way to unexist it. As such, any attempts to limit civilian use of this technology will directly lead to corporate and government oppression powered by this technology.

JoshTriplett 3mo ago
1) We can prevent larger models from being made. 2) We can treat them the way we treat uranium refining operations: too dangerous to be allowed to exist.
- matheusmoreira 3mo ago
  > We can prevent larger models from being made. Do that and I guarantee some CIA goons will make the larger models in some black site either way. We're not "preventing" anything. We're in a full on arms race, and unlike nukes, powerful AI models are a strategic capability at the individual level. Everybody's got a stake in this. Anyone who ignores this stuff is probably not gonna make it. > We can treat them the way we treat uranium refining operations: too dangerous to be allowed to exist. Too dangerous to be done by anyone other than the government and their "trusted" corporations, you mean.
  - JoshTriplett 3mo ago
    > Too dangerous to be done by anyone other than the government and their "trusted" corporations, you mean. Seriously, try reading my comments rather than assuming what they say: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49077577 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49077577
    - matheusmoreira 3mo ago
      I read them just fine. I was trying to interpret them charitably. You're contradicting yourself. You just claimed we all collectively treat uranium refinement operations as too dangerous to exist. Not only do they exist, they are regulated by governments so that only trusted people are allowed to do it.
      - JoshTriplett 3mo ago
        Which is not quite as good as "doesn't exist", but better than "widely done around the world". And it's been successfully kept from being used for more than eight decades. For AI we need to do better than that, but that's a bare-minimum demonstration that we can recognize the problem of such technologies and do something about it.
- barnabee 3mo ago
  Without international agreement and cooperation, which is not happening, we can’t