3 ms·

Note that Jeff and crew have cleverly structured their company to avoid problematic uses of AI (e.g., weapons or tracking humans). I suspect that many top resea

Note that Jeff and crew have cleverly structured their company to avoid problematic uses of AI (e.g., weapons or tracking humans). I suspect that many top researchers will want to work there for this reason, and to work with other top researchers who have a history of delivering results.

paganel 2mo ago
There's this somewhere on that page: > securing cyberspace, which has clear military implications, at least in today's age.
- tmoertel 2mo ago
  Do you believe that securing cyberspace is problematic solely because it has military implications? I mean, everything has military implications. That fact doesn't imply, however, that those things are bad for society.
  - paganel 2mo ago
    > I mean, everything has military implications In essence I agree with that, it's just that cyber-security has particularly been the focus of recent military discourse. Just yesterday I was reading an article here in the Romanian mainstream media about how Constanta Port's (our biggest port at the Black Sea) IT infrastructure has been under constant cyber attacks (presumably by the Russians) so as to hinder the export of Ukrainian grains through it. And this is just one of the many such (relatively) recent examples.
- bredren 2mo ago
  Securing cyberspace matters to everyone. Defending critical infrastructure or design of tactical cyber-offense is reasonably in scope for military work. However, reducing (or rather limiting the increase of) PII leakage and impact of ransomware activities is much closer to day-to-day mainstreet of most people. Anyone committed to advancing science should care about this regardless of its potential contributions to defense.
- jedberg 2mo ago
  So does more efficient cooking methods, but that is not the primary focus. As opposed to say weapons systems or targeting systems, which are really only for military use. The military needs a lot of things that other people need, and some things that only the military needs. If you don't work on the things only the military needs, I think you're in the clear.
2001zhaozhao 2mo ago
> Note that Jeff and crew have cleverly structured their company to avoid problematic uses of AI Do you have more sources/info on this?
- moralestapia 2mo ago
  x2 All the "bad guys" of today were the "good guys" at some point in time. You even cheered for them back then.
  - sidibe 2mo ago
    Maybe a little naive for this but given the decades Jeff Dean and Sanjay have been contributing to so many things in the industry and never heard a bad word about either, they never seemed to reach for attention or self promote, going to give them a little more of a cachet of trust.
- tmoertel 2mo ago
  They do not call attention to this aspect of their new company, but it is implicit in their business model: https://xcancel.com/JeffDean/status/2085034604172603724 https://xcancel.com/JeffDean/status/2085034604172603724 In short, they are in the business of using AI to automate the discovery of useful knowledge, not to sell general-purpose AI capabilities that could be directly used in troubling ways.
  - 2001zhaozhao 2mo ago
    The question is what they plan on doing with all their scientific knowledge once they succeed. Sure, they'll keep it internal for a while to make sure their knowledge bank is more thorough than everyone else's, and because oftentimes discoveries can be far more convincing internally than externally (you need fewer sigmas for it to update your belief in a certain direction). But then how do they intend to profit from it in the end?
    - scottyah 2mo ago
wavemode 2mo ago
Like how OpenAI is (was?) structured as a nonprofit?

paganel 2mo ago

There's this somewhere on that page: > securing cyberspace, which has clear military implications, at least in today's age.

tmoertel 2mo ago
Do you believe that securing cyberspace is problematic solely because it has military implications? I mean, everything has military implications. That fact doesn't imply, however, that those things are bad for society.
- paganel 2mo ago
  > I mean, everything has military implications In essence I agree with that, it's just that cyber-security has particularly been the focus of recent military discourse. Just yesterday I was reading an article here in the Romanian mainstream media about how Constanta Port's (our biggest port at the Black Sea) IT infrastructure has been under constant cyber attacks (presumably by the Russians) so as to hinder the export of Ukrainian grains through it. And this is just one of the many such (relatively) recent examples.
bredren 2mo ago
Securing cyberspace matters to everyone. Defending critical infrastructure or design of tactical cyber-offense is reasonably in scope for military work. However, reducing (or rather limiting the increase of) PII leakage and impact of ransomware activities is much closer to day-to-day mainstreet of most people. Anyone committed to advancing science should care about this regardless of its potential contributions to defense.
jedberg 2mo ago
So does more efficient cooking methods, but that is not the primary focus. As opposed to say weapons systems or targeting systems, which are really only for military use. The military needs a lot of things that other people need, and some things that only the military needs. If you don't work on the things only the military needs, I think you're in the clear.

2001zhaozhao 2mo ago

> Note that Jeff and crew have cleverly structured their company to avoid problematic uses of AI Do you have more sources/info on this?

moralestapia 2mo ago
x2 All the "bad guys" of today were the "good guys" at some point in time. You even cheered for them back then.
- sidibe 2mo ago
  Maybe a little naive for this but given the decades Jeff Dean and Sanjay have been contributing to so many things in the industry and never heard a bad word about either, they never seemed to reach for attention or self promote, going to give them a little more of a cachet of trust.
tmoertel 2mo ago
They do not call attention to this aspect of their new company, but it is implicit in their business model: https://xcancel.com/JeffDean/status/2085034604172603724 https://xcancel.com/JeffDean/status/2085034604172603724 In short, they are in the business of using AI to automate the discovery of useful knowledge, not to sell general-purpose AI capabilities that could be directly used in troubling ways.
- 2001zhaozhao 2mo ago
  The question is what they plan on doing with all their scientific knowledge once they succeed. Sure, they'll keep it internal for a while to make sure their knowledge bank is more thorough than everyone else's, and because oftentimes discoveries can be far more convincing internally than externally (you need fewer sigmas for it to update your belief in a certain direction). But then how do they intend to profit from it in the end?
  - scottyah 2mo ago

wavemode 2mo ago

Like how OpenAI is (was?) structured as a nonprofit?