7 ms·

> The strongest argument I see for continuing to train much smarter models quickly is the need to build defensive systems against the dangers posed by other AI.

> The strongest argument I see for continuing to train much smarter models quickly is the need to build defensive systems against the dangers posed by other AI. Yikes! I really wonder about the cognitive dissonance necessary to work at OpenAI these days. They’re in an arms race to build a machine god, knowing full well that it could end humanity.

bogzz 11d ago
Money me. Money now. Me a money needing a lot now.
- ramesh31 11d ago
  SWEs better start looking for the job cannon.
  - bogzz 11d ago
    My helmet is on.
  - polytely 11d ago
    actually starting to look at a physical cannon to shoot at silicon valley
shepherdjerred 11d ago
https://theonion.com/sam-altman-if-i-dont-end-the-world-someone-far-more-dangerous-will/ https://theonion.com/sam-altman-if-i-dont-end-the-world-some...
NickNaraghi 11d ago
This[0] continues to be one of the most useful articles I’ve ever read. [0]: https://www.slatestarcodexabridged.com/Meditations-On-Moloch https://www.slatestarcodexabridged.com/Meditations-On-Moloch
27183 11d ago
> They’re in an arms race to build a machine god, knowing full well that it could end humanity. Fantasies built upon extrapolations derived from fever dream delusions. "Could end humanity"? Come on, it's a computer program just like Microsoft Clippy.
- igleria 10d ago
  I can think of several computer programs that are stored in big 5.1/4 floppy discs that could end humanity in... half an hour.
  - 27183 10d ago
    It would require an authorized human to load the floppy into the drive and make it go. And there's nothing special about that process being done in code, it could just as well be done by people flipping switches manually. There's just no plausible way, in the real world, that a computer program running in some datacenter is going to make this happen. Or anything of any dire existential consequence. It's not a real threat.
    - igleria 10d ago
      I think I disagree! You can always manipulate a human. It's true tho that this particular example has a myriad of failsafes, so the actual example I wrote is less than interesting.
      - 27183 10d ago
        > You can always manipulate a human. Yes, but to make "apocalyptic" scenarios happen your AI would need to manipulate at least millions of people. So far it's not yet clear they can successfully manipulate even one, or even that "manipulate" is a coherent concept, since LLMs pretty clearly have no agency or intrinsic goals. So like... I guess if we start seeing AI systems autonomously throwing elections and starting wars I'd be more concerned? It doesn't look likely anytime soon.

bogzz 11d ago

Money me. Money now. Me a money needing a lot now.

ramesh31 11d ago
SWEs better start looking for the job cannon.
- bogzz 11d ago
  My helmet is on.
- polytely 11d ago
  actually starting to look at a physical cannon to shoot at silicon valley

shepherdjerred 11d ago

https://theonion.com/sam-altman-if-i-dont-end-the-world-someone-far-more-dangerous-will/ https://theonion.com/sam-altman-if-i-dont-end-the-world-some...

NickNaraghi 11d ago

This[0] continues to be one of the most useful articles I’ve ever read. [0]: https://www.slatestarcodexabridged.com/Meditations-On-Moloch https://www.slatestarcodexabridged.com/Meditations-On-Moloch

27183 11d ago

> They’re in an arms race to build a machine god, knowing full well that it could end humanity. Fantasies built upon extrapolations derived from fever dream delusions. "Could end humanity"? Come on, it's a computer program just like Microsoft Clippy.

igleria 10d ago
I can think of several computer programs that are stored in big 5.1/4 floppy discs that could end humanity in... half an hour.
- 27183 10d ago
  It would require an authorized human to load the floppy into the drive and make it go. And there's nothing special about that process being done in code, it could just as well be done by people flipping switches manually. There's just no plausible way, in the real world, that a computer program running in some datacenter is going to make this happen. Or anything of any dire existential consequence. It's not a real threat.
  - igleria 10d ago
    I think I disagree! You can always manipulate a human. It's true tho that this particular example has a myriad of failsafes, so the actual example I wrote is less than interesting.
    - 27183 10d ago
      > You can always manipulate a human. Yes, but to make "apocalyptic" scenarios happen your AI would need to manipulate at least millions of people. So far it's not yet clear they can successfully manipulate even one, or even that "manipulate" is a coherent concept, since LLMs pretty clearly have no agency or intrinsic goals. So like... I guess if we start seeing AI systems autonomously throwing elections and starting wars I'd be more concerned? It doesn't look likely anytime soon.