ke88y

28 ms·

271.
by ke88y 3y ago
> But how is someone who doesn't know you or your network supposed to assess this? IDK. And FWIW I'm not even sure that the leaders of those organizations all agree on the type and severity of risks, or the actions that shoul
272.
by ke88y 3y ago
Perhaps. It's also possible that they don't understand how dangerous what they've created is because it feels so "normal" and "pedestrian" to them. See also: nuclear scientists getting radiation poisoning,
273.
by ke88y 3y ago
I considered that when replying. I don't think I am making a personal criticism just for the sake of it, or an ad hom. And I do think the observation I am making is interesting. I don't mean it as a personal attack. Really. Suppos
274.
by ke88y 3y ago
FWIW, my bias leans the opposite direction. I benefit from AI risk hype. I agree with everything you said and I think exaggerating capabilities and risks distracts society from doing that important work.
275.
by ke88y 3y ago
> But terrible, banal things will be done at the behest of these systems and nobody is talking about it. Well said. Fewer Terminator and War Games fantasies, more boring risk analyses. Amen.
276.
by ke88y 3y ago
The tldr is that both of them urged Roosevelt to develop the weapon, and only later when the destructive potential of the bomb was obvious expressed regret. Einstein's 1938 letter to Roosevelt was the first step toward the Manhattan pr
277.
by ke88y 3y ago
>Arguments that presuppose a god-like super intelligence are not useful. Sure, if we create a system that is all powerful I’d agree that it can destroy humanity. But specifically how are we going to build this? Yeah, exactly. THIS is t
278.
by ke88y 3y ago
I'm dismissing the survey, and I think you should as well. That's an orthogonal issue to actual x-risk, and I covered a bit more here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36577523 > I'd personally sugges
279.
by ke88y 3y ago
> One side seems to have much better quality of evidence. Since I AM an expert, I care a lot less about what surveys say. I have a lot more experience working on AI Safety than 99% of the ICM/NeurIPS 2021 authors, and probably cl
280.
by ke88y 3y ago
> Yes? Obviously? I mean, I agree, obviously. My point is that most people don't. And I think for two reasons. The first and more important reason is that most people aren't involved in The Discourse and don't want to be
281.
by ke88y 3y ago
> Not the guys working at OpenAI or anthropic or deep mind. A lot of them do. A huge percent of people who aren't speaking out are rolling their eyes. But what are you supposed to do? Contradict your boss's boss's boss?
282.
by ke88y 3y ago
> I repeat everyone that is loling at x-risk an idiot I mean this is the nicest possible way and hope that you consider it constructive: you're willfully misconstruing what I am saying and then calling me an idiot. This isn't
283.
by ke88y 3y ago
I'm laughing at the study methodology, not the underlying topic. Please don't call me idiotic. I'd wager I have spent at least 10,000 hours more than you working on (real) safety analyses for (real) AI systems, so refraining
284.
by ke88y 3y ago
Perhaps, but I doubt it. Never attribute to malice what can instead be attributing to stroking massive egos.
285.
by ke88y 3y ago
> We contacted approximately 4271 researchers who published at the conferences NeurIPS or ICML in 2021... we found email addresses in papers published at those conferences, in other public data, and in records from our previous survey a
286.
by ke88y 3y ago
> What is his criticism? I heard in some interview, I think with Bloomberg, where he said that claims about regulatory capture were "so disingenuous I'm not sure what to say", or something like that. I think he's pr
287.
by ke88y 3y ago
> Don’t forget that most of these engineers down in the trenches can’t see further than their battlefield. I don't think this is the case at all. I'm not primarily talking about a junior or even senior engineer with a decade
288.
by ke88y 3y ago
Right. I'm not at all sure what the siblings are talking about. I suspect at least one is confusing linear with feed-forward? But I'm also surprised that Hofstadter keys in on this so heavily. The fact that he wrote an entire pop-
289.
by ke88y 3y ago
This is something weird happening around Rationalism/X-Risk/AGI prognostications. The "Great Minds And Great Leaders" types are rushing to warn about the risks, as are a large number of people who spend a lot of time phi
290.
by ke88y 3y ago
I'd argue the boom and also the bust happened for that exact reason. And that something similar is happening now with AI. Without OSS we might have seen a more tepid period in the late 90s (smaller boom), as only those who could licens
291.
by ke88y 3y ago
> Without OSS being a thing, they just keep using it without sharing it to the world. But OSS is a thing and they did share it with the world. > Your examples are actually proving the opposite of your point :) How so? Despite the
292.
by ke88y 3y ago
> Lol at thinking that pytorch and tensorflow are oss If BSD isn't open source then I don't know what is. > I mean they're definitely free but have you ever tried submitting a patch for something that doesn't ma
293.
by ke88y 3y ago
Linux, PyTorch, TensorFlow, literally every programming language used everywhere except perhaps MATLAB and CUDA (and even there most of the libraries are OSS, and those languages aren't FAANG property anyways) I think there's a ke
294.
by ke88y 3y ago
I love the Seagull Articles of Incorporation! https://www.seegull.org/articles-of-inc.html Definitely need more of this. It's strange that, in the west, we're deeply committed to these basic values in all institut
295.
by ke88y 3y ago
Agreed. I believe "competency" is orthogonal to "liberal constitutional-republican and/or democratic values". This is exactly what I mean when I say that we are not at The End Of History. Western values need not n
296.
by ke88y 3y ago
> In the USA, government spending accounts for 37% of GDP First, and most importantly, this is a critique of all societal institutions. I do not think that the correct solution is necessarily taxation and redistribution. The investors
297.
by ke88y 3y ago
The scientific vision, leadership, and work was done by other folks. Emad saw the opportunity but primarily contributed cash and connections, which in the west means he gets to control everything. As a result, he is currently setting a trag
298.
by ke88y 3y ago
Dogmatism is more about ideas and ideologies, while partisanship is more about in-groups and out-groups. Dogma is -- by its very denotation -- inflexible. Partisans have no issue with flexibility.
299.
by ke88y 3y ago
In some poorly designed markets, AirBNBs also started competing with long-term rentals. The fact that they're the ones caught with their pants down when the tide goes out is not surprising.
300.
by ke88y 3y ago
I'm describing the USA today, not the USA at the time of the Homestead strike.

More ›