camgunz

6 ms·

1.
by camgunz 3d ago
I honestly have no idea what this word salad means.
2.
by camgunz 3d ago
> 50% of the world's population lives in nuke-capable countries. Are you saying you prefer Pakistan getting nukes over India's population doubling since 1975? That seems silly. Also this is only because of China and India, so t
3.
by camgunz 3d ago
I don't know, but it's also what Kevin Rudd thinks [0]. He was Australia's prime minister (twice, lol), Australia's foreign minister, a foreign service officer working in China, and the author of a dissertation on Xi Ji
4.
by camgunz 3d ago
People are working really hard to not see the "until there's a federal commission and safe processes" part.
5.
by camgunz 3d ago
Finally, we agree. Even Dario Amodei thinks we should halt work on intelligence until we can do it safely.
6.
by camgunz 3d ago
"Were we on the brink of a nuclear holocaust multiple times? Maybe yes, maybe no. But hey Google Maps!"
7.
by camgunz 4d ago
Countries use nuclear power too. The reason they don't launch nukes at the drop of a hat is MAD. I don't see how this isn't analogous to what we could do with AI.
8.
by camgunz 4d ago
I don't think working on LLMs is the same as working on superintelligence (personally I don't think superintelligence is on the table, but whatever)
9.
by camgunz 4d ago
The point is an arms race is bad for everyone. "I don't know what WW3 will be fought with, but I do know WW4 will be fought with sticks and stones" type of stuff.
10.
by camgunz 4d ago
No I think it's fine for 9 countries to have existing models and to coordinate development with each other, which is the general outline of all NPTs.
11.
by camgunz 4d ago
The bill doesn't ban it. It pauses it until a regulatory body and processes are established. That seems pretty reasonable.
12.
by camgunz 4d ago
After over 80 years since the US used nuclear weapons against Japan, less than 5% of the world's countries have nuclear weapons, and no one's used one on another country since. If you don't think that's an incredible ach
13.
by camgunz 4d ago
Is it even possible to steal this code? How much of it is uncopyrightable LLM output?
14.
by camgunz 5d ago
Two things I would say. One: nuclear non-proliferation has been pretty successful; we can use a similar model for AI. Two, China's major motivation for developing competitive AI isn't to reap the benefits from an an important new
15.
by camgunz 6d ago
Sing it with me now, "these things aren't inteeeeeeeelligeeeeeeeent"
16.
by camgunz 11d ago
You think we only recently discovered how to tell if someone is obese?
17.
by camgunz 11d ago
You think rates of these things are increasing in children because we live longer?
18.
by camgunz 11d ago
No, because walking around or eating raw food wasn't essential to being human. Thinking is.
19.
by camgunz 11d ago
> humans, on average, are healthier and live longer than ever in human history. Kinda. We also have incredible rates of cardiovascular disease, obesity, and diabetes. While I do mostly buy that the mind and the body are connected, I don&
20.
by camgunz 15d ago
I won't defend the Trump admin, but I will quibble on Anthropic's efforts to be a good actor. It's easy to ask for regulation when you know it won't come (or you'll easily bear the token fines). It's easy to th
21.
by camgunz 16d ago
> No one's making them do it, but just because they stop doesn't mean others will. Pausing just means they give up control. It's like asking the US to unilaterally disarm -- it just guarantees that the less scrupulous grou
22.
by camgunz 17d ago
My thing got a little heat but I didn't see for a couple days, so I thought I'd just let it stand. But it's late and I'm reading through my old comments and, while it's necro, thought I'd do a reply here. I&#x2
23.
by camgunz 17d ago
Yeah. It's a lot easier to destroy than create, and though I think LLMs are mostly shit at creating, they're much better at the simpler destroy task. To be clear, we don't know and probably can't know everything that hap
24.
by camgunz 17d ago
They could not build the torment nexus.
25.
by camgunz 17d ago
Nah the reason is way simpler and more craven: so people like you will post what you just did. They can stop whenever they want; no one's making them do any of this. There's two possibilities here. One: they know this tech is craz
26.
by camgunz 17d ago
I've read almost nothing about this, but I bet they put an unreliable LLM or 20 on it.
27.
by camgunz 17d ago
I think you have to believe one of two things here. 1. Frontier labs are incapable--either technologically or culturally--of safely developing these powerful systems and should either stop or be forced to stop. At least the FBI should be as
28.
by camgunz 20d ago
Hey, respect, how do you think I got all this karma?
29.
by camgunz 20d ago
I mean people sell posts sure. Are you selling yours?
30.
by camgunz 20d ago
They have an extensive comment history; I doubt it.

More ›