The A.I. Dilemma - March 9, 2023

Pretty much the entire AI industry is like this now. Similar to Web3 industry before it, except AI is potentially far more dangerous. AI Experts have predicted a chance of 10-20% human level extinction from AI, have a history of underestimating AI, but companies are rushing to the precipice, and it is just the early days. Everyone should listen to this warning: ▶ this video

It's very sad that people lack the imagination for the possible horrors that lie beyond. You don't even need the imagination; Hinton, Bengio, Tegmark, Yudkowsky, Musk, etc. are spelling it out for you. This moment, 80% of comments are derisive, and you actually have zero idea how much is computer generated bot content meant to sway opinion by post-GPT AI industry who see themselves as becoming the next iPhone-era billionaires. We are fast approaching a reality where our information space breaks down. Where almost all text you get from HN, Twitter, News, Substack; almost all video you get from Youtube, Instagram, TikTok; is just computer generated output meant to sway opinion and/or make $. I can't know Altman's true motives. But this is also what it looks like when a frontrunner is terrified at what happens when GPT6 is released and if they don't, the rest of the people who see billionaire $ coming their way are close at your heels trying to leapfrog you if you stop. Consequences? What consequences? We all know social media has been a net good, right? Many of you sound exactly like the few remaining social media cheerleaders (of which there were plenty 5 years ago) who still think Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, isn't causing depression and manipulation. If you appreciated what The Social Dilemma illuminated, then watch the same people on AI: ▶ this video

Have you watched this video? ▶ this video (You don't have to, of course. An hour-long video recommended by a stranger on the internet is a big ask) There's a ton of evidence that this is moving way faster than people think. I don't think there's anything particularly special about human intelligence. And time and time again, we've been able to copy things that nature does and make them way more powerful, like planes vs birds. It does the same thing, but in a completely different way. It would be surprising if we couldn't do it with brains. I feel like a lot of people are not going to admit that we have already created AGI until we literally have an unstoppable AI that has taken over everything. It's not human level everywhere , but it's way better than humans in a lot of ways. It's never going to be exactly human, it'll work differently than we do. But if you count intelligence as the ability to achieve goals, which is how most researchers do, then we're already pretty much there.

I agree, insofar that most of the discourse I've seen often neglects fundamental drivers of our economy such as the division of labor and has undue focus on outcomes that are less likely to come to pass, as opposed to risk oriented discussion which is key in risk management. There was a very good video someone posted not too long ago that covers what should be covered as an overview. Link: ▶ this video Any engineer knows as soon as the rate of change exceeds the reaction time, you can't keep up and failures happen. In the case of systems, the larger the system the bigger and more damaging the failure. We're dealing with societal mechanics, so failures may have global impact.

link This link convinced me otherwise. I wasn't too sure before (I'm a little ashamed to admit I hadn't been following the development of SB 1047). I will also specifically share this talk on YouTube: ▶ this video I think this passing this bill would have probably been a very good idea. Not perfect, but far, very far from broken. Edit: I'm actually not sure if we as a community gave this topic enough attention leading in the months leading up to the announcement of this decision.

You seem under the mistaken impression that if I can't cite it, its not happening. This is why cascade failures cause so much mayhem and death. Because so many people subscribe to show me proof, and if there is no tangible proof because proof is a lagging indicator its not happening. This is a complete failure in any professional risk management. This is like a dam collapsing, I'm pointing at a crack, and you are saying show me proof this crack will cause everyone in the valley below to die. Its a flawed way of thinking in many ways especially with fundamental things that we base our lives and welfare on (as a society). In engineering there is different criteria for evaluating risk with items that are safety-critical. This is safety critical. Here is an example of a copyrighter losing her job. There are many other examples if you bother to go looking. link You can dispute it all you want, it won't make you any less wrong when it happens, and many experts are deeply concerned because the rate of change has been exponential even if you refuse to believe it. There's a video that covers the important parts if you want to educate yourself, its on youtube. ▶ this video

Yesterday, I randomly watched his full interview from a month ago with CBS Morning, and found the discussion much more nuanced than today's headlines. link The next video in my recommendations was more dire, but equally as interesting: ▶ this video

"Tristan Harris and Aza Raskin discuss how existing A.I. capabilities already pose catastrophic risks to a functional society, how A.I. companies are caught in a race to deploy as quickly as possible without adequate safety measures, and what it would mean to upgrade our institutions to a post-A.I. world." ▶ this video A very succinct quote from this presentation, by Yuval Noah Harari: "What nukes are to the physical world... AI is to the virtual and symbolic world."

Been involved with LLMs for the past 2 years, and what I can say is we have no idea what the technology can do, and we have no way of monitoring when it gains new abilities. We're racing towards autonomous everything, and we're too slow and blind to even detect hidden exponential developments. Here's a good overview to get up to speed: ▶ this video

Surprised there hasn't been more discussion on this on HN. Podcast and transcript: link Video: ▶ this video The argument against putting a potential bioweapon (etc.) in everyone's pocket is compelling, but I fear that the cat is already out of the bag.

It's an open secret that social media and engangement metrics has created something that we don't know how to undo now. No media whether it be news or entertainment will show you anything but what they think gets extra engagement. Outrage, clickbait, infinite scrolling, auto-playing content, recommendations etc. Just have a look at r/teachers to see what the next generation of kids look like. They can't concentrate more than 30 seconds. I'm no expert on this subject, so I would just recommend watching the AI Dilemma video which goes a bit into the social media side, but also talks about LLMs. ▶ this video

In this very interesting video, Tristan Harris and Aza Raskin argue that LLM's can feasibly generate their own training data sets [1]. It's a very interesting (and a slightly alarming) talk, maybe check it out. [1] ▶ this video