6 ms·
Dramatic insider warnings over AI fall flat with some in Silicon Valley
- gregglain 3d agoI don't see the part about helping quarterly earnings. #useless. Next.
- christkv 3d agoThis is literally the story of the boy who cried wolf.
- bananaflag 3d agoYou know how that story ends right?
- tucnak 3d agoThe boy finally gets government regulation he's been begging for, in the form of total government control, becomes subservient to the corrupt, evil interests at the helm of that government, and ends up loving exactly none of it?
- amelius 3d agoAt least tell us where the datacenters are located so we can do something if shit hits the fan.
- chrisjj 3d agoThe ones of most concern will by then be too heavily defended. Donald got a preview only this year.
- glimshe 3d agoAs long as they don't connect WOPR, I mean, Claude to the nukes, we'll be fine.
- embedding-shape 3d agoWho are they? > Anthropic Says Iran Used Its American AI Model to Target U.S. Navy Warships - https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/anthropic-says-iran-used-its-american-ai-model-to-target-u-s-navy-warships-67583e05 https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/anthropic-say... Seems the US<>Iran war might actually be OpenAI<>Anthropic in reality. Are nation wars now proxy wars for our corporate overlords?
- jauco 3d agoI don’t think openai decided to have the us attack iran in order to attack anthropic? So no. This is not a war between our corporate overlords.
- amelius 3d agoAn AI can hire/bribe people to do stuff. Blackmailing is easy if you have tons of personal data. Scale matters too. Imagine a coordinated group of 1000 intelligent humans hellbent on launching nukes. Would you feel safe knowing that this group of people exists?
- embedding-shape 3d ago> Imagine a coordinated group of 1000 humans hellbent on launching nukes. Would you feel safe knowing that this group of people exists? I mean no, but what am I supposed to do, dismantle the entire US military and especially the leadership, all by myself, just because they are hellbent on launching nukes?
- hypendev 3d agoThese people do exist, and it's been a consistent threat to international security pretty much since discovery of the atomic bomb. Yet, they did not achieve their goals, due to monitoring systems in place. Just look at Nth Country Experiment - if it was that easy, why hasn't it happened yet?
- amelius 3d ago
- comrade1234 3d agoIt's just a bunch of drama from two American companies trying to lock in their lead via government regulation. Meanwhile I'll just keep using open-weight models.
- cineticdaffodil 3d ago[dead]
- indy 3d agoIs this a signal that open models are becoming good enough for a lot of people?
- password54321 3d agoYes, they are manufacturing consent for banning open-weight models while they privately do whatever they want without sharing anything with the public except dramatic warnings.
- indy 3d agoThat's exactly what it looks like to me, I guess it's time to re-evaluate those open models.
- pizza234 3d agoCan't talk for models in the range of ~100 GiB, but 32 GB ones are extremely basic.
- sublinear 3d agoThe actual risk from AI is not its "intelligence", but the profound stupidity of the humans connecting it to important infrastructure. This has got to be the last straw with the anthropomorphization. I swear listening to the pro-AI crowd is like listening to an autistic child babble on and on and on about their way cool robot sketches in their notebooks. These are not adults and there are no robots.
- onetokeoverthe 3d ago[dead]
- mdp2021 3d ago> the profound stupidity of the humans Which poses the need for getting Intelligence somewhere. > connecting it to important infrastructure Are you aware that agentic NNs can try and do it on their own quirk? Agentic NNs are the bad idea. In general, "empowering morons" is the bad idea. > anthropomorphization I, for one, have no idea what you are talking about in context.
- chrisjj 3d ago> The actual risk from AI is not its "intelligence", but the profound stupidity of the humans connecting it to important infrastructure. Yes, but unfortunately that important infrastructure is the internet - due to a previous round of stupidity connecting utilities etc. The chance of sense prevailing to make the necessary disconnections is near zero.
- gregglain 3d agoLet's talk a single water utility. 1980's, full local operations. They connect to the internet and use that for updates and operations. Then in close down or minimize their ops center because remote, and replace/reduce people with less skilled cheaper options (guessing here) Scale that, it's expensive to go back
- mitchbob 3d agohttps://archive.ph/IsMB6 https://archive.ph/IsMB6
- bananaflag 3d agoTo everyone who believes that this is some nefarious plot by CEOs to bring about regulation or to hide that they've hit a wall or to make their models seem more capable or whatever: The AI risk arguments are philosophical arguments that are 20-30 years old and don't have anything to do with the current corporate landscape. They were thought of by people who really care about the issue and all the "gotcha" lines have well-developed counters. Of course they might be stuck in their ideology but they deserve a bit more credit. I don't doubt that AI CEOs can profit from a crisis and that they don't necessarily have our best interests at heart. But this is the same way governments during COVID tested how much they can restrain freedom. This doesn't mean COVID doesn't exist or that vaccines are evil or ineffective or whatever. Same way here, if there is an advantage to CEOs to regulate things doesn't mean AIs can't kill us all and that regulation might bring us more time to solve alignment. Also: I accept I might be wrong and AI risk might be a fake issue and/or alignment might be impossible, but please bring better arguments if you want to convince me.
- iLoveOncall 3d ago> To everyone who believes that this is some nefarious plot by CEOs to bring about regulation or to hide that they've hit a wall or whatever It's this but also much more that those insiders just want to pump the value of their stocks by making it seem like the unreleased models are much stronger than they actually are. OpenAI said GPT-2 was too powerful to release, Antropic said Mythos was too powerful to release. Both are GA now and everyone has long realized those supposed fears were just lies.
- embedding-shape 3d ago> OpenAI said GPT-2 was too powerful to release, Antropic said Mythos was too powerful to release. Both are GA now and everyone has long realized those supposed fears were just lies. Is it possible they weren't "lies" but they were still "wrong" yet still they felt they were possibly too powerful to release? It's like there is two modes "Right and truthful and honest" or "Wrong, liar and dishonest" and there is never any nuance or understanding that people can be truthful yet wrong.
- Arodex 3d ago>One conference speaker, Grindr CEO George Arison, told the BBC he believed this week's comments from Coxon and others were indicative of an "anti-civilisational worldview at Anthropic". >He called them "dangerous" and said they had prompted him to instruct some engineers at the LGBTQ+ dating app to stop using Anthropic's technology. >"It is irresponsible for us as stewards of our shareholders' money to be relying on a business that does what this company does, in terms of its public statements," he said. "Yes, the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders" but without any irony.
- hackingonempty 3d agoMaybe they can use their brilliant super AI to address some real and present threats that are being ignored like nuclear annihilation, the loss of the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force established after WWII, the certainty of all of the fossilized carbon being dug up out of the ground and released into the environment, the resurgence of measles and a poor posture for the next pandemic, ETC...
- mdp2021 3d agoObviously that is one of the needs. It clashes with zero-sum game mentalities - and they are part of what needs to be overcome (further questions for the superconsultants).
- pizza234 3d agoThis is actually a recurring pattern among technology maximalists: pushing technology as the solution to every problem, without recognizing that some problems are human in nature, rather than technological.
- chrisjj 3d agoOh they recognise that. The fail is they think all human problems have technological solutions. And fail to appreciate the extent to which past tech solutions have contributed to those problems in the hands of humans such as themselves.
- chrisjj 3d agoFunny you should say that. I was just thinking we need to ban the world's most unreliable and untrustworthy technology from being applied to the world's most critical problems.
- aqme28 3d agoIt's weird that we have two parallel discussions and they're not meeting in the obvious middle. OpenAI is out there hacking HF, RubyGems, etc... Dario is talking about restricting the frontier, pausing development. The problem is that "restricting the frontier" benefits no one as much as the frontier labs. But there are other ways to force alignment-- make companies liable for these felonies their agents commit. Make them liable, and they might actually devote the necessary resources to fixing these problems, rather than throwing their hands up and just saying "Trust nobody buy us", which obviously no one does.
- roryirvine 3d agoThe CEO of Grindr, fresh from illegally sharing users' HIV status with advertisers, complains that a company displaying scruples is "anti-civilisational". Astonishing.
- khazhoux 3d agoAd hominem
- Arodex 3d agoHe is literally doing the "Yes, the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders" bit but without any irony.
- roryirvine 3d agoOn the contrary, Grindr's history of appalling behaviour is entirely germane when discussing their CEO's criticism of other companies for being "anti-civilisational".
- khazhoux 3d agoLiterally ad hominem, though. I doesn’t matter one bit about what Grindr has done, when discussing whether AI is “anti-civilization.”
- classified 3d agoAfter years of propaganda war and boundless "creative marketing", Misanthropic and ClosedAI have lost all credibility. With trillions in investments on the line, it's not too far fetched to assume that those warnings have been bought. A few hundred millions in PR expenses are less than a drop in the bucket compared to debts. I do notice an uptick in drama intensity. Could it be they're being pressured to IPO soon?
- dalemhurley 3d agoI agree with the host of the All In podcast, often I don’t. This is about creating a moat that open source models cannot compete with, regulation. It is purely ensuring only a few providers can compete. The future is edge and open source models. Both Apple and Google are working towards this. Cloud AI will be for offloading when the edge is not capable. Most cases edge will be suffice. Further inference costs keep coming down. Vertical integration might be the biggest challenge of the AI industry. Trying to manage electricity generation, training, inference, harness and end user for enterprise and consumer is a lot of moving parts.
- hypendev 3d agoSo, as someone who works with LLM's daily and even trained his own, who's enjoying the benefits of this technology daily, I'm supposed to: - Listen to someone who just collected a few ten/hundred million building AI at a frontier lab, then decided to call it "existential crisis for humanity" and suddenly is going to work at a regulatory body made exactly for this - Listen to CEO's of billion dollar startups nearing-IPO and are calling for "a pause in development" and regulatory capture, while they have the frontier covered and keep extracting value there like nothing happened - Listen to "the people" apparently, as NGO's like irreplaceable.org are trying to say, pretending they are normal everyday people while the organizations are being ran by political lobbyists and people who do political non-profits for a living - Listen to "the doomers", which mostly consists of people that have never written any code or aren't even tech-adjacent, talking about sci-fi scenarios like they are our current reality, i.e. "AI replicating itself across servers and building weaponized drone/biolab/robot factories while nobody notices" like it's a serious threat we have, without any thought to the insane sequence of events and failures needed to get there, and the actual possibility of being noticed at each step of the way. - Listen to the folks promoting their books, substacks and podcasts talking about AI doom, where the folks involved are mostly again, not engineers and have no clue on how any of this tech works, but just spout technobabble pretending it's a real thing. - Listen to people whose job is "AI safety expert", which needs the panic to ensure it's existence and importance, and which is mostly comprised of people prompting AI in different ways No thanks, I'll rather use DeepSeek.
- chrisjj 3d ago> So, as someone who works with LLM's daily and even trained his own, who's enjoying the benefits of this technology daily, I'm supposed to: > - Listen to someone who just collected a few ten/hundred million building AI at a frontier lab, then decided to call it "existential crisis for humanity" I'll bet in fact you are exactly the type who is not supposed to listen to this. The aim is prevention not cure.
- sensanaty 3d agoWhat's the bet the people that quit recently got paid some hefty severance packages with an exit note about what to write?
- skeledrew 3d agoUntil I see someone provide a sufficiently detailed scenario connected to current frontier capabilities that leads to the claimed "end of things", I also say this is just another "boy crying wolf" event. Why should I listen to anyone saying something is X when they've provided 0 proof or even a reasonable grounded argument for why it's X? And no, the Hugging Face and other spontaneous hacks don't count; they were just the models attempting to solve problems they were prompted with.