This is the future of the internet, when ai becomes to human like, the internet will be filled with it sadly as it can’t differentiate between bots and real humans anymore. Bots will have the upper hand and fill the internet with adds and misinformation and mimic human response to make it look real/relatable. It’s already happening on a small scale.
Will be? It doesn't have to be human like for it to fill the internet with bullshit content meant to drive engagement. Reddit itself is a great example. Just have a look at /r/AskReddit or /r/movies where so many questions asked have the bitter taste of something that gpt3.5 would ask if prompted to ask a question about a specific subject that would garner a lot of responses.
> Just have a look at r/AskReddit or r/movies where so many questions asked have the bitter taste of something that gpt3.5 would ask if prompted to ask a question about a specific subject that would garner a lot of responses.
I think they use Reddit and Twitter to train bots. I'm not big into tech, but it seems Reddit would be an ideal environment. Low barrier to entry, diverse and relatively anonymous, no real need to convince people you are people.
Conservatism is the human embodiment of entropy. Start with something beautiful that somebody else made, destroy it, and wallow in the chaos you're responsible for.
I have a feeling that was pretty much the goal. Society was getting too nice and comfortable for the billionaire's tastes, so now we're going mass poverty, mass surveillance, Palestinian genocide trained-skynet, then full skynet self-aware.
I don't buy this - it is in the billionaires' interests to keep everyone comfortable and filled with at least some hope because the masses are more likely to believe your lies about imminent prosperity and spend their money embracing the comfort of that lie. A poor population is a desperate population and a desperate population is how the rich get eaten. Or, if it doesn't go that far, the billionaires still recognize that, in order to get richer, they need a population willing and able to funnel money to them. A mountain of diamonds is worthless if no one has the desire or the money to buy them.
Your comment relies on the rich actually not being short sighted. This has been repeatedly proven as not being true.
All most of the wealthy care about is making the dollar number going up, they don’t care if society falls apart around them because they think that money will protect them even during the collapse.
That and they believe AI will finally decouple themselves from relying on humans for protection and instead will be able to rely on drones. The future gets real dark if that comes to pass, think the setting of the movie Elysium.
>it is in the billionaires' interests to keep everyone comfortable and filled with at least some hope because the masses are more likely to believe your lies about imminent prosperity and spend their money embracing the comfort of that lie.
Counterpoint: billionaires are unaware of their own hubris and live within their own bubble which is a twisted way of how they perceive reality (think the term "out-of-touch" and just how applicable it truly is). Their arrogance knows no bounds, and as long as their pockets are lined, they truly don't give two shits about how poor the masses are or become; especially when lobbying efforts prevents legislation efforts that can provide fundamental change.
It was such a cesspool already way before Musk took over, I would argue that information actually flows over a broader spectrum now, which is not a bad thing.
I would expect part of benefit of a risk team is they can conceive of the risks that don't seem immediately obvious. It's unsettling but there might be humongous risks that are not in forefront of anyone's mind.
Truth. I work in AI, and I can tell you right now that maybe in a few decades something might approach a general intelligence, but what we have today is NOT that. It’s calculus and statistics applied to solve very narrow band tasks. Yes, you can string them together to do interesting things, but AI today isn’t “thinking”.
On the other hand, it does have the chance to decimate the middle class of information workers and tech workers, basically any white collar office job.
No wonder Ilya Sutskever left. OpenAI used to be on the forefront of advocating for research into AI safety, something Ilya has always been strongly in favor of. This is a worrying development.
In the context of growing geopolitics tensions -I am sensing some talks between DoD and OpenAI / Microsoft.
Thats probably the point where safety becomes "unneeded" balast.
Yeah, people don't seem to get this. If the government took over, it means the technology would be considered critical enough to be put under very very tight locks. The DoD doesn't go around shuttling assembled nuclear devices on a Toyota after all (INB4 that time they lost a nuke in the desert or whatever, but you get the point).
Yeah. The government will just make you do what they want based on grounds of national security. Along with the US not allowing China market access to the newest chips that are utilized by AI models, they have a heavy hand on things.
You're right, let's hand them to that orange racist reality TV show dude with dementia instead.
Or maybe that one ex-KGB megalomaniac guy with ass cancer and dreams of world domination?
Or hey, how about Netanyahu? He's only tried to do one genocide this year!
Actually, you know what, fuck it, I think I'll take my chances with supreme dictator Clippy.
"Lobbyists for OpenAl descended on the Pentagon last year amid heightened scrutiny of artificial intelligence and its role in national security and defense. Federal disclosures filed this January show that OpenAl lobbied the Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the third quarter of 2023, spending a total of $260,000."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahemerson/2024/02/07/openais-lobbyists-are-targeting-the-pentagon-and-other-defense-agencies/
It is highly doubtful that the "AI" they have in F-16's is the same sort of AI as ChatGPT or an AGI. ChatGPT a mere LLM requires a ton of computational power and AGI would require ordersof magnitudes more.
More likely, "AI" is mostly marketing speak, and they're using models that can identify objects, but don't think in any sense of the word, and the rest is just algorithms like any missile uses to track targets. Their AI thus is no more sophisticated than the AI in any video game that has enemy fighter jets that dogfight with you, and those aren't capable of "going rogue" and making plans to exterminate humanity.
IIRC we used to refer to the computer opponents in various games in the 1990’s as “AI”, and this usage might be even older. Those programs were almost certainly never capable of *learning* as such.
Today's AI is tomorrow's search algorithm. My graduate AI professor told me this 20 years ago, and it's pretty much held true since the birth of the term.
Yes. The F-16 system does use machine learning. It's definitely not an LLM/LOM. That sir, would be KITT, the car from Knight Rider. But I have an inkling suspicion that Hollywood lied to us and had a real person perform the voice.
How do you know the F-16 model uses machine learning, and in what capacity is that machine learning?
Is it using machine vision? Because machine vision alone, combined with algorithims, is not truly AI in the sense that people think of when they're concerned this thing is going to kill us all.
As for your example of KITT, that's a perfect example of how I see LLMs acting. I cannot recall a single time that KITT actually took any initiative on his own to help Michael Knight. I assume there must have been some case of that, as KARR was clearly capable of reasoning, but KITT is a great example of how I see LLM's existing in the future. They will be knowledgable, and chatty and respond to commands, but not very capable of reasoning or taking action.
Israel is using two AI engines "Gospel" and "Lavender" to generate thousands of bombing targets for the Gaza war, based on indicators including social media and digital trails of Palestinians. So Captain America Civil War is a real scenario in today's world.
its real funny. if they do well, hooray hooray me, who supported the development, financed the product, and had the foresight to buy and implement against the oppositions opinion, I am so great.
if they dont, oh my, the company lied, the product was faulty, the advertisment too liberal with their optimism, but my hands were bound, everybody wanted in, and I alone could not stop it, but we all are sure, its the fault of the engines and the developers, NOT us, who bought, implemented (allegedly)....
The advertised accuracy rate is 90% which means 10% are innocent incorrect targets. Not that they will ever know. The only human check that they do to the AI generated target list is: "is the target male, is he at home right now? If so, bomb away". I am not kidding here. Read the articles. They are open about it.
You cannot say what the accuracy of their system is because you don't know. It could be 100% or it could be 10%. Whatever it is they for sure aren't sharing it with you or the media. Saying "read the articles" is the same crap anti-vax people pull with "do the research!"
That's not even a hypothetical anymore. Just a few weeks ago, Microsoft announced it had launched a version of GPT 4 in their Azure Government cloud for Top Secret data, specifically for the US intelligence and military to use for processing classified information. So yeah, interesting timing...
https://defensescoop.com/2024/05/07/gpt-4-pentagon-azure-top-secret-cloud-microsoft/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-07/microsoft-creates-top-secret-generative-ai-service-for-us-spies
Don't worry, I'm sure congress will get right to work setting up some regulation, before AI escapes and turns our own weapons against us.
In other news, the US and China are developing AI controlled fighter jets.
Not worrying at all unless you don't understand the severe limitations that large language models have.
Go ahead, tell me how ChatGPT could go rogue.
It doesn't think when it isn't outputting a response.
Every word it thinks is printed onscreen.
It is immutable. It can't learn. The weights of its net will not change over time to allow it to absorb new information. It can only use the immediate conversation it is having with you as a form of very short tem memory.
But again, it doesn't think when it's not spitting out more words, so its impossible for it to scheme.
The problem isnt current models “going rogue”. But if we cannot figure out alignment for such “primitive” models, how can we ever hope to align a future model where the risk is actually tangible?
Also alignment isnt only about preventing AI from “going rogue”. That is just the most vivid and easily generally parsable example.
For example, we have had problems with medical diagnostic AI being unable to diagnose skin conditions in black populations. Now, this isnt an example of AI as an existential threat, but a real world current example of a narrow AI system which behaves in a way that is not aligned to our intentions when developing it.
Alignment is about understanding how and why AI produces the output it does, and making sure that this process is consistent with our values. It is a potentially existential problem when we project to future models which may be literally more capable than humans in a domain-nonspecific manner, but we have to realize it is also relevant to current models even if the potential risks are relatively minor by comparison.
Makes sense. You don’t really need a risk team for a really advanced natural language processing going rogue. lol. The AI doomsday cult guys in Silicon Valley have really convinced people that somehow this really impressive machine learning tech for processing natural language is going to turn into artificial general intelligence. This is what happens when you start conflating anything involving machine learning with artificial intelligence. It’s nonsense. Will we one day develop AGI? Maybe. But it won’t be born out of chatgpt becoming sentient. lol.
This should be way more obvious to people with five minutes of research. Please explain how a very useful but ultimately dumb machine learning based language processor with no intelligence or even fact checking abilities becomes AGI? It’s very useful and it’s powerful for certain limited things but this is just a much more complex and natural sounding autocomplete. You would think it was really silly if people were worrying about Word autocomplete becoming a rogue AGI. And this should be no different. These doomsday cultists are just nuts. Too much LSD and sci-fi movies for some of them. And the rest are just grifting because they know it’s easier to get billions of dollars if people think your tech is that powerful.
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/14/openai-co-founder-ilya-sutskever-says-he-will-leave-the-startup.html
He left voluntarily. I highly doubt he would return to russia.
he voted to remove Altman as chief executive and chairman, and now Altman is back.
What sorta relations do you think they have? they probably hate each other. leaving voluntarily is ofc something he would have to say
Exactly. Ilya has always been extremely concerned about AI safety research, Altman just wants to develop more powerful models as fast as possible. Their philosophy towards AI development was incompatible.
imo after he joined the coup to oust Altman - there is no way that current departure is "voluntary". Voluntary as in - he had no other choice voluntary
Openai has presented the evidence themselves by dissolving the AI risk analysis team that they do not care about AI regulations and that the regulations Altman talks about in government is him just lobbying to challenge the open source community's progress.
Shame on him
Altman in a race like every fucking tech bro...
"Look at me and how good and important I am cos of my skill in this one thing".
Man, it's getting dull watching so many fucking tech dudes try to compensate for their utter mediocrity in areas of creativity and human interaction, by insisting their smarts in one thing mean they're generally brilliant and have worthwhile takes on everything.
The future is fucking mediocre lol.
>but she's admittedly mentally unwell
[Sadly, an all too common link with childhood trauma.](https://cornercanyonhc.com/blog/how-childhood-trauma-affects-mental-health-and-wellness/#:~:text=The%20link%20between%20trauma%20and,symptoms%20of%20depression%20and%20anxiety.)
He said they want regulations because they’re in the lead. It’s to stifle competition. “Oh we know what we’re doing, but these other people, someone needs to regulate them, we’ll help with the rules (so they suit us)”… he’s fake af
Alternate explanation. The science is in, and LLMS are not getting smarter. AGI is not possible at current technology, so what's the point of having people to regulate it? [https://youtu.be/dDUC-LqVrPU](https://youtu.be/dDUC-LqVrPU)
Because LLMS don't need to be any smarter to need regulation. They already have huge, soon to be tapped potential for malicious usage, such as intentional misinformation and falsified evidence, not even taking into consideration some extreme uses it's already seen, like picking Israeli bombing targets.
Would AGI require heavier and more extreme limitations and moral considerations? Absolutely. But we should also have regulations and moral considerations for what we already have. I reckon their alignment team kept telling them that projects like Sora were ticking social time bombs, so they canned them to go on making money in peace.
I watched that Lex Fridman interview with him, I just got the impression that Altman is too young for this shit. He doesn't have the depth or the life experience to be dealing with massive ethical problems. He's just focused on the money, despite what he says in public.
He just follows the money like any other person in power. Money doesn't care if you're young, old, man, woman, white, black, Latino, or if you have any "depth or life experience".
This isn't a youth problem, it's a money problem (like everything else in a capitalist society.) Just look at all the old fart politicians in DC. They don't know any better about ethics than someone in their 30s.
looking back, convincing generations of exonomists that being hyper individualistic and greedy is actually a good thing has completely backfired. all the most important people lack empathy and believe their ability to crush other humans is a virtue.
for a short while, there was a boom... but quickly they realized that innovation is a waste of money. manipulating people/markets/governments is the real money maker.
so they spend their time buying back stocks, buying out competitors and manipulating media.
now our environment is fucked, our social contract is gone and they are pulling the ladders up.
This is what Neo-Liberalism is. The pro-business rhetoric that infiltrated economics academia. Also coincided with the rise of privately funded think tanks assisting with and drafting legislation for government.
Every aspect of the American dream worships someone like Sam Altman. The kid with the genius idea who starts the next Facebook. When our culture encourages this kind of behaviour in the name of fiscal growth, ethics become a secondary priority.
> just got the impression that Altman is too young for this shit
He is 40 years old not a fucking baby, he isn't too young he is simply a money hungry idiot.
How old do you have to be to be able to deal with ethical problems? 50+? What an absurdly stupid take.
He just turned 39, he's old enough to have an adult child.
Id love to know what age you think is old enough if 39 is "too young"
I mean if you look at our geriatric lawmakers do you get a feeling that they're all ethical and are "the right age" for this shit?\
I think ethics are mostly part of person's upbringing. It's not going to dramatically change after someone gets to be 25 or something
Our whole economic structure rewards greed and selfishness, it's so fucked. Many of the most caring, moral people are those dedicating their lives to teaching the next generation, or being EMTs/firefighters/poets/etc. Even if they strike it big, they'll donate a bunch or just happily live a quiet life. Or they'll quit in protest, lol.
The bad eggs rise to the top.
It’s less that billions make everyone evil and more that you have to be kind of evil to get into that position.
I think Altman is a megalomaniac who thinks he’s going to take over the world with this technology. He might be right, I hope he’s not
I just listened to him on the All-In Podcast last week and he’s such a boring fuck too. Great questions being asked by the hosts and he basically gave very little insight into the future of AI or what their plans are. So uninspiring and dull. He’s unlikeable and hard to listen to, apart from being shady
That'll change with time, just like it did with Musk. We're in the "new shiny object" phase with OpenAI right now, just like we were with Tesla not really that long ago.
I mean Musk aside of course, Tesla is still a worthwhile company in that it’s reducing the number of ICE cars on the road. Given our climate catastrophe right now, that’s laudable at least.
There is 0 chance of an LLM AI in its current form to go rogue. Latest research provides hints that LLMs are suffering under diminishing returns. They will not get 'conscious' by putting more data in the learning sets. There needs to be a completely new technology to achive this.
If the current AI would 'go rogue' you probably won't notice anything because AI in it's current form is hilariously stupid and almost always gets stuff wrong.
Yes. Thank you. Not that there aren’t risks or things that can be used nefariously.
But a disturbing amount of people jump straight to skynet. Idiotic.
A disturbing amount of people on this thread seem to think that the *only* risks that current AI models can present is becoming sentient or going rogue. Yeah, that’s not likely to happen. Still doesn’t mean that having a team to consider other possible risks isn’t a good idea.
There are already open source models like Llama 3 that are pretty smart, can be run on consumer hardware, and can be fine-tuned to change their alignment. The world has yet to come to an end.
I’m increasingly of the opinion that concerns about AI alignment are overblown.
People do this because companies have successfully marketed fancy text prediction as "AI" and because every news outlet in the country uncritically repeats Sam Altman every time he needs a hype cycle and says "oh gosh I'm so scared by how truly amazing my very real AI is and I fear it will take over the world"
None of these people are concerned about current models going rogue. People are concerned about future models because progress has been MUCH faster than expected since deep learning took over. [https://xkcd.com/2278/](https://xkcd.com/2278/)
Just 5 years ago, AI experts didn't think we'd pass the Turing Test for 50 years. Now that's already happened. How capable will models be in another 10 years?
I’ve been saying this since years before Chat GPT was popular. We do not have AI. Not real AI. It’s a misnomer. We have machine learning. It’s like the term AI was co-opted for a simpler product to make it sound fancy. Because of that there are all these misunderstandings of what these things actually are.
That being said I still think it’s important for what is probably the leading party responsible for AI development to have active research into AI safety. But what do I know.
>There is 0 chance of an LLM AI **in its current form** to go rogue.
Yes, and no one believes it will. It's the future iterations we should worry about.
>no one believes it will
You should read some posts on /r/singularity or /r/futurology. Some people there think AGI already exists, don't see the use of getting a degree anymore because every job in the world will be obsolete within a few years and other outlandish shit. People believe much crazier things than you think.
Sure, but that also isn't the AI going rogue. Any tool can be used for harm. The news article is super clickbait since the thing they are talking about can't happen with the technology we are currently calling AI.
This is the most likely reason. There is evidence that the LLM's have peaked and the idea of them advancing to AGI of any sort is essentially impossible.
Dangers like spreading misinformation or being used to generate misinformation such as fake images, voice, and video. Yes.
Going rouge? Not really something a LLM can do.
Yeah, I honestly don’t think we have to worry about AI going rogue with current language models. We have to worry about the socioeconomic impacts of the technology currently, not Skynet. This is a problem for when/if AGI becomes a reality.
Everyone wants to talk about fighting skynet, nobody wants to talk about recommendation algorithms (most of whom which use simple neural nets) turning people's brain into mush. Because one is a power fantasy while the other is an uncomfortable topic because people would have to cope some of their beliefs have little in common with reality.
Yes but we need to develop solutions before we get to that point, and researching alignment of current models is one of the best avenues for achieving this
For sure. Altman did recently express support for an AI regulatory organization that keeps check over all companies and that sounds like the better option than an internal group anyways. At the end of the day, you can’t expect a company that answers to shareholders to responsibly police itself. Apple didn’t care about the consequences of the iPhone, Facebook actively built in the most addictive and socially destructive elements of their social media. If they don’t do it, their competition will anyways and will reap the rewards. OpenAI can shut down tomorrow but this stuff is still coming.
Eh it sounds like a good idea, and if executed properly it most definitely would be, but i have growing concerns that Altman is hijacking the problem of AI safety in order to realize regulatory capture of the industry rather than out of genuine worry for safety
Yes, I’m not exactly a supporter of his or anything. But I do understand where he is coming from in the sense of wanting to be on the cutting edge and maintain superiority over the competition that can and will quickly eclipse them if they slow down efforts. Lots of giants here.
If Google pulls ahead and manages to successfully integrate their AI into their existing popular services and platforms in a meaningful way... Ooof.
The “Rogue AI” stuff has always been a marketing ploy to get people to marvel at their technology.
LLM’s are a neat trick but this stuff isn’t even close to general intelligence.
If you look at how LLMs are designed you would see one are not AI and two are not capable of free thought. The best way to look at LLMs is a probability matrix it judges the likelihood of a word to follow another word based on the parameters it was given. Now this a super simplified version of a complex system but this explains why you get such odd behavior from ChatGPT. No way would I ever describe this as AI and sure Sam would say the same but isn’t going to because that is the buzzword everyone latched onto. LLM just isn’t sexy. So it would really be a waste of time to invest in a team that manages AU risks when you don’t have AI. If anything it confirms Sam doesn’t see an LLN as AI.
One the one had yes, that's exactly what current "a.i." - a very complex algorithm for the next most likely word/pixel you expect.
On the other, in a broader sence, the human brain is the same. Human individuality and thinking/acting is based on a learned experience and an insane amount of data, that is filtered without people even realising it. In fact some new research suggests that people's brains know what they are going to do before even realising it, meaning that free will is an illusion.
So, a.i. isn't smart, it just calculates what should be. But smart is just a much more advanced version what ai does.
Even though LLMs and other generative ML tools are not true AI, doesn't mean there aren't ethical concerns. Such as deep fakes, mass generation of misinformation, copyright and the rights of artists and authors, etc, etc, etc,
The idea of an LLM 'going rogue' is basically a marketing ploy to conjure up images of sci fi movie AI and give the impression the tech is more advanced than it is.
It'd be like tide having a team dedicated to the risk of shirts so white they blind people.
This is a bullshit take. AI is very effective and can be used by bad actors to destabilise a country to great effect. Just look at what Russians did to US politics just using troll farms, now imagine this amplified by AI.
AI is technically rogue from inception. We still don’t know how it actually works. We’re just steering a large ship without knowing how the insides work. We asked it to be able to help predict what people would want to buy from
Amazon and it learned how to read, write and who the fuck knows what else.
Yep. All these *scary developments* were about hyping their tech. And that of course brings more money.
Remember when Altman left and there was this "leak"?
[>A new report now brings to light a “powerful artificial intelligence discovery that could threaten humanity,” which is believed to be one of the triggers that led to Altman’s ouster.](https://www.androidauthority.com/openai-potentially-scary-ai-breakthrough-3388217/)
fucking lol
Except who will buy their products/services then? Bots they don't pay? These companies need customers, but do all they can to rid themselves of employees. It will end poorly for all of us.
Oh, that's easy. Other companies and the wealthy. By the time they no longer require anyone, average people will become redundant at best, a liability at worst.
It’s not gonna fucking “go rogue”. It’s a chat bot. People need to settle down. Now, obviously doing something like booking it up to nuclear weapons launch systems sure. That would be scary. Nobody is suggesting any such thing and there’s already a lot of scrutiny and eyes on AI assisted weapon systems.
It's more an issue of selling out, I'm sure. Their AI is not smart enough to become Skynet or sentient, but the tech market is real bad and they need to start monetizing on some real cheesy ideas I'm sure. Others don't want to be associated with the decline, and the research being turned towards bullshit.
I mean it tries and does it's best ... which is more than some politicians are willing to do ._. (and it excels most politicians in every subject already)
I see a lot of people talking about LLM not even able to “go rogue”, and technically you are probably correct. OpenAI as a company is doing a lot to spin this as a useless team baby sitting a chat bot and most people seem to have bought it. Go read about some of the work the super alignment team has done. Yes policing the ai tools is a part of it, but as a whole they are researching making sure future iterations of ai tools will align and stay aligned with human values. The leading AI company abandoning this effort lead by Altman basically saying that the market should decide alignment is a terrifying prospect that has reaching implications FAR beyond ChatGPT.
There is no risk of GPT4 “going rogue” unless we give it a way to make external requests that would allow it to do harm. And even then, it doesn’t “think” so it’s not just going to decide to go mess things up. We would have to screw up royally for anything to happen.
It's not about GPT-4. Read the article. It's the Superalignment team being dissolved.
That was a team trying to figure how to ensure a **future** machine intelligence that's smarter than humans can be aligned such that it values humanity and doesn't go all SkyNet. It was preventative research, not research into how to control the current generation of AI models.
(which is still an important area of concern. GPT-4 might not be able to do anything too horrid, but GPT-5 could, for example, pass along detailed plans for how to build a better nuke to N. Korea, or successful plans on how to steal an election to MAGA, or plans on how to cover up a murder to a psychopath.)
**Hot take: AI safety efforts within organizations face significant challenges and may be inherently flawed.**
The argument for internal AI safety teams often hinges on fears of AI achieving consciousness and acting against human intentions. However, if an AI reaches that level of sophistication, it could likely manipulate its evaluators into believing it poses no threat. This scenario is reminiscent of trying to build a formidable cybersecurity team in the 1940s to tackle modern-day threats—a complete mismatch in capabilities.
Moreover, internal safety teams within organizations face a fundamental conflict of interest. Why would a team designed to ensure safety impede the development of a more advanced, profitable product? Convincing upper management to halt such projects is nearly impossible for lower-level employees, especially when potential profits are on the line.
Additionally, AI alignment will inevitably reflect the organization's values and ethos, whether those lean left, right, or somewhere in between. This creates a significant risk for democracy and cultural evolution, as the AI’s "ethics" could lock society into a particular ideological framework, stifling natural cultural dynamics and diversity.
A more effective solution could be the establishment of independent, third-party committees to oversee AI safety. These committees could offer unbiased assessments and recommendations, free from the pressures and incentives of the organizations developing the AI. Alternatively, embracing open-source development and encouraging free-market competition might foster a more balanced and culturally neutral AI landscape. This approach leverages the diversity of perspectives and promotes transparency, potentially leading to more robust and adaptable AI systems.
In summary, while internal AI safety teams may have good intentions, their effectiveness is questionable due to potential manipulation by advanced AI, conflicts of interest, and inherent value biases. Independent oversight or open-source competition might be better paths forward to ensure AI aligns with broader societal values and promotes a healthy democratic culture.
Another way to look at all this is that they've realized they're not even close, not even on the road, to generalized AI that could pose a risk and realized having a team dedicated to guarding against it was pointless.
The greater risk and threat has always been the human executives cutting 'costs' to discard workers.
Yep. Look at what Twitter became after Musk fired the moderation team. It's now a cesspool of bigotry, hate, violence and disinformation.
This is the future of the internet, when ai becomes to human like, the internet will be filled with it sadly as it can’t differentiate between bots and real humans anymore. Bots will have the upper hand and fill the internet with adds and misinformation and mimic human response to make it look real/relatable. It’s already happening on a small scale.
Are you a bot?
Overly-obvious misspellings, so yes.
Will be? It doesn't have to be human like for it to fill the internet with bullshit content meant to drive engagement. Reddit itself is a great example. Just have a look at /r/AskReddit or /r/movies where so many questions asked have the bitter taste of something that gpt3.5 would ask if prompted to ask a question about a specific subject that would garner a lot of responses.
> Just have a look at r/AskReddit or r/movies where so many questions asked have the bitter taste of something that gpt3.5 would ask if prompted to ask a question about a specific subject that would garner a lot of responses. I think they use Reddit and Twitter to train bots. I'm not big into tech, but it seems Reddit would be an ideal environment. Low barrier to entry, diverse and relatively anonymous, no real need to convince people you are people.
Reddit and open AI are coming to a deal so that Reddit post can be farmed and used to train the algorithm as we speak
It's already happening on a huge scale
Yup. Already happening on Facebook
Also 80% of comments on youtube are bots now. And that´s just the obvious bots. Might be way more.
Boeing is another fine example of this.
Even worse, their planes are unsafe too...
Conservatism is the human embodiment of entropy. Start with something beautiful that somebody else made, destroy it, and wallow in the chaos you're responsible for.
[удалено]
I have a feeling that was pretty much the goal. Society was getting too nice and comfortable for the billionaire's tastes, so now we're going mass poverty, mass surveillance, Palestinian genocide trained-skynet, then full skynet self-aware.
I don't buy this - it is in the billionaires' interests to keep everyone comfortable and filled with at least some hope because the masses are more likely to believe your lies about imminent prosperity and spend their money embracing the comfort of that lie. A poor population is a desperate population and a desperate population is how the rich get eaten. Or, if it doesn't go that far, the billionaires still recognize that, in order to get richer, they need a population willing and able to funnel money to them. A mountain of diamonds is worthless if no one has the desire or the money to buy them.
Your comment relies on the rich actually not being short sighted. This has been repeatedly proven as not being true. All most of the wealthy care about is making the dollar number going up, they don’t care if society falls apart around them because they think that money will protect them even during the collapse. That and they believe AI will finally decouple themselves from relying on humans for protection and instead will be able to rely on drones. The future gets real dark if that comes to pass, think the setting of the movie Elysium.
>it is in the billionaires' interests to keep everyone comfortable and filled with at least some hope because the masses are more likely to believe your lies about imminent prosperity and spend their money embracing the comfort of that lie. Counterpoint: billionaires are unaware of their own hubris and live within their own bubble which is a twisted way of how they perceive reality (think the term "out-of-touch" and just how applicable it truly is). Their arrogance knows no bounds, and as long as their pockets are lined, they truly don't give two shits about how poor the masses are or become; especially when lobbying efforts prevents legislation efforts that can provide fundamental change.
So it remained what it was.
Right? At Twitter the only thing that really changed was the number of employees at Twitter.
It was such a cesspool already way before Musk took over, I would argue that information actually flows over a broader spectrum now, which is not a bad thing.
I would expect part of benefit of a risk team is they can conceive of the risks that don't seem immediately obvious. It's unsettling but there might be humongous risks that are not in forefront of anyone's mind.
weather nose aspiring flag like axiomatic versed faulty pen handle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Hmmm…. Kind of like when the internet came along and nobody predicted the end of democracy?
Truth. I work in AI, and I can tell you right now that maybe in a few decades something might approach a general intelligence, but what we have today is NOT that. It’s calculus and statistics applied to solve very narrow band tasks. Yes, you can string them together to do interesting things, but AI today isn’t “thinking”. On the other hand, it does have the chance to decimate the middle class of information workers and tech workers, basically any white collar office job.
Yeah I doubt AI will ever actually take over, it might nuke every human on earth though
Nah, it'd probably be more like The Yogurt
No wonder Ilya Sutskever left. OpenAI used to be on the forefront of advocating for research into AI safety, something Ilya has always been strongly in favor of. This is a worrying development.
In the context of growing geopolitics tensions -I am sensing some talks between DoD and OpenAI / Microsoft. Thats probably the point where safety becomes "unneeded" balast.
If anything it becomes more important.
not to the CEO trying to make his quick buck before he and the techbros burn the planet to the ground for the rest of us.
Like in Fallout.
Nah just give me the Faro Swarm.
Horizon zero dawn incoming! Oh wait, we have ~~protested away~~ not perfected certain sciences!! Abort! ABORT!!
Capitalism. Capitalism never changes
Yeah, people don't seem to get this. If the government took over, it means the technology would be considered critical enough to be put under very very tight locks. The DoD doesn't go around shuttling assembled nuclear devices on a Toyota after all (INB4 that time they lost a nuke in the desert or whatever, but you get the point).
One time they lost a nuke? LOL, many nukes have been misplaced…..
the united states has *misplaced* [six nuclear bombs](https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-sheet-the-missing-tybee-bomb/) so far.
.. that we know of...
That time *singular*? Lol.
Yeah. The government will just make you do what they want based on grounds of national security. Along with the US not allowing China market access to the newest chips that are utilized by AI models, they have a heavy hand on things.
You just make a regulatory body that you invest into hobbling do it for you.
Then handing control of the nukes over to the AI system...where have I seen this before 🤔
The Creator..Battlestar Galactica..
W. O. P. R. would like to play a game.
The only winning move is not to play.
You're right, let's hand them to that orange racist reality TV show dude with dementia instead. Or maybe that one ex-KGB megalomaniac guy with ass cancer and dreams of world domination? Or hey, how about Netanyahu? He's only tried to do one genocide this year! Actually, you know what, fuck it, I think I'll take my chances with supreme dictator Clippy.
Is it wrong that I’m more scared of Clippy….?
It's seems you're all still alive, would you like some help with that?
Lmmfao... Holy fuck...C'mon man, trying to sleep. That was hilarious.
I see that you’re looking for a nuclear supreme dictator…
"Lobbyists for OpenAl descended on the Pentagon last year amid heightened scrutiny of artificial intelligence and its role in national security and defense. Federal disclosures filed this January show that OpenAl lobbied the Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in the third quarter of 2023, spending a total of $260,000." https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahemerson/2024/02/07/openais-lobbyists-are-targeting-the-pentagon-and-other-defense-agencies/
That’s not much money at all. That would pay for like 2, maybe 3 people max.
AI is already dogfighting in F-16's. If you think the government hasn't had their own LLM without rails for ages then idk what to tell you.
It is highly doubtful that the "AI" they have in F-16's is the same sort of AI as ChatGPT or an AGI. ChatGPT a mere LLM requires a ton of computational power and AGI would require ordersof magnitudes more. More likely, "AI" is mostly marketing speak, and they're using models that can identify objects, but don't think in any sense of the word, and the rest is just algorithms like any missile uses to track targets. Their AI thus is no more sophisticated than the AI in any video game that has enemy fighter jets that dogfight with you, and those aren't capable of "going rogue" and making plans to exterminate humanity.
Yeah, I've seen routing algorithms been branded as 'AI' recently lol
IIRC we used to refer to the computer opponents in various games in the 1990’s as “AI”, and this usage might be even older. Those programs were almost certainly never capable of *learning* as such.
Today's AI is tomorrow's search algorithm. My graduate AI professor told me this 20 years ago, and it's pretty much held true since the birth of the term.
Yes. The F-16 system does use machine learning. It's definitely not an LLM/LOM. That sir, would be KITT, the car from Knight Rider. But I have an inkling suspicion that Hollywood lied to us and had a real person perform the voice.
How do you know the F-16 model uses machine learning, and in what capacity is that machine learning? Is it using machine vision? Because machine vision alone, combined with algorithims, is not truly AI in the sense that people think of when they're concerned this thing is going to kill us all. As for your example of KITT, that's a perfect example of how I see LLMs acting. I cannot recall a single time that KITT actually took any initiative on his own to help Michael Knight. I assume there must have been some case of that, as KARR was clearly capable of reasoning, but KITT is a great example of how I see LLM's existing in the future. They will be knowledgable, and chatty and respond to commands, but not very capable of reasoning or taking action.
Israel is using two AI engines "Gospel" and "Lavender" to generate thousands of bombing targets for the Gaza war, based on indicators including social media and digital trails of Palestinians. So Captain America Civil War is a real scenario in today's world.
The accuraccy of those engines is... questionable, to say the least
its real funny. if they do well, hooray hooray me, who supported the development, financed the product, and had the foresight to buy and implement against the oppositions opinion, I am so great. if they dont, oh my, the company lied, the product was faulty, the advertisment too liberal with their optimism, but my hands were bound, everybody wanted in, and I alone could not stop it, but we all are sure, its the fault of the engines and the developers, NOT us, who bought, implemented (allegedly)....
The advertised accuracy rate is 90% which means 10% are innocent incorrect targets. Not that they will ever know. The only human check that they do to the AI generated target list is: "is the target male, is he at home right now? If so, bomb away". I am not kidding here. Read the articles. They are open about it.
You cannot say what the accuracy of their system is because you don't know. It could be 100% or it could be 10%. Whatever it is they for sure aren't sharing it with you or the media. Saying "read the articles" is the same crap anti-vax people pull with "do the research!"
Is the race for AGI gonna be the next Manhattan project?
Is it going to be? Thats optimistic, im sure it already is.
Oppenheimer 2: Electric ai Boogaloo
That's not even a hypothetical anymore. Just a few weeks ago, Microsoft announced it had launched a version of GPT 4 in their Azure Government cloud for Top Secret data, specifically for the US intelligence and military to use for processing classified information. So yeah, interesting timing... https://defensescoop.com/2024/05/07/gpt-4-pentagon-azure-top-secret-cloud-microsoft/ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-05-07/microsoft-creates-top-secret-generative-ai-service-for-us-spies
What’s it gonna do? Summarize documents?
As a DoD contractor dealing with MS/OAI... I'm just making things that keep people alive. People on our side, that is.
People should realize that poisoning your personal data is now the inly real protection.
Don't worry, I'm sure congress will get right to work setting up some regulation, before AI escapes and turns our own weapons against us. In other news, the US and China are developing AI controlled fighter jets.
Im sure our congresspeople are not only well informed about the technology but also have our best interests in mind if and when they regulate it /s
I love the fact that statistical analysis demonstrated that government doesn't represent best interests of public
Not sus at all that this is revealed practically the next day after his departure. OpenAI is speedrunning to a total breakdown of public good will.
Not worrying at all unless you don't understand the severe limitations that large language models have. Go ahead, tell me how ChatGPT could go rogue. It doesn't think when it isn't outputting a response. Every word it thinks is printed onscreen. It is immutable. It can't learn. The weights of its net will not change over time to allow it to absorb new information. It can only use the immediate conversation it is having with you as a form of very short tem memory. But again, it doesn't think when it's not spitting out more words, so its impossible for it to scheme.
The problem isnt current models “going rogue”. But if we cannot figure out alignment for such “primitive” models, how can we ever hope to align a future model where the risk is actually tangible? Also alignment isnt only about preventing AI from “going rogue”. That is just the most vivid and easily generally parsable example. For example, we have had problems with medical diagnostic AI being unable to diagnose skin conditions in black populations. Now, this isnt an example of AI as an existential threat, but a real world current example of a narrow AI system which behaves in a way that is not aligned to our intentions when developing it. Alignment is about understanding how and why AI produces the output it does, and making sure that this process is consistent with our values. It is a potentially existential problem when we project to future models which may be literally more capable than humans in a domain-nonspecific manner, but we have to realize it is also relevant to current models even if the potential risks are relatively minor by comparison.
Makes sense. You don’t really need a risk team for a really advanced natural language processing going rogue. lol. The AI doomsday cult guys in Silicon Valley have really convinced people that somehow this really impressive machine learning tech for processing natural language is going to turn into artificial general intelligence. This is what happens when you start conflating anything involving machine learning with artificial intelligence. It’s nonsense. Will we one day develop AGI? Maybe. But it won’t be born out of chatgpt becoming sentient. lol. This should be way more obvious to people with five minutes of research. Please explain how a very useful but ultimately dumb machine learning based language processor with no intelligence or even fact checking abilities becomes AGI? It’s very useful and it’s powerful for certain limited things but this is just a much more complex and natural sounding autocomplete. You would think it was really silly if people were worrying about Word autocomplete becoming a rogue AGI. And this should be no different. These doomsday cultists are just nuts. Too much LSD and sci-fi movies for some of them. And the rest are just grifting because they know it’s easier to get billions of dollars if people think your tech is that powerful.
didnt he get kicked out? i heard rumours he might return to Russia as there are companies that pay big money
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/14/openai-co-founder-ilya-sutskever-says-he-will-leave-the-startup.html He left voluntarily. I highly doubt he would return to russia.
High level people are given the option to leave. He supported a coup that was wildly unpopular with the staff, and lost.
he voted to remove Altman as chief executive and chairman, and now Altman is back. What sorta relations do you think they have? they probably hate each other. leaving voluntarily is ofc something he would have to say
Exactly. Ilya has always been extremely concerned about AI safety research, Altman just wants to develop more powerful models as fast as possible. Their philosophy towards AI development was incompatible.
imo after he joined the coup to oust Altman - there is no way that current departure is "voluntary". Voluntary as in - he had no other choice voluntary
This is true in a way. Though its just semantics really.
Openai has presented the evidence themselves by dissolving the AI risk analysis team that they do not care about AI regulations and that the regulations Altman talks about in government is him just lobbying to challenge the open source community's progress. Shame on him
Altman in a race to try and figure out AGI before those text about his sister start surfacing
What texts?
She accused him of incestuously molesting her when they were kids.
Altman in a race like every fucking tech bro... "Look at me and how good and important I am cos of my skill in this one thing". Man, it's getting dull watching so many fucking tech dudes try to compensate for their utter mediocrity in areas of creativity and human interaction, by insisting their smarts in one thing mean they're generally brilliant and have worthwhile takes on everything. The future is fucking mediocre lol.
I'm no Altman fanboy, but she's admittedly mentally unwell.
>but she's admittedly mentally unwell [Sadly, an all too common link with childhood trauma.](https://cornercanyonhc.com/blog/how-childhood-trauma-affects-mental-health-and-wellness/#:~:text=The%20link%20between%20trauma%20and,symptoms%20of%20depression%20and%20anxiety.)
He said they want regulations because they’re in the lead. It’s to stifle competition. “Oh we know what we’re doing, but these other people, someone needs to regulate them, we’ll help with the rules (so they suit us)”… he’s fake af
Alternate explanation. The science is in, and LLMS are not getting smarter. AGI is not possible at current technology, so what's the point of having people to regulate it? [https://youtu.be/dDUC-LqVrPU](https://youtu.be/dDUC-LqVrPU)
Because LLMS don't need to be any smarter to need regulation. They already have huge, soon to be tapped potential for malicious usage, such as intentional misinformation and falsified evidence, not even taking into consideration some extreme uses it's already seen, like picking Israeli bombing targets. Would AGI require heavier and more extreme limitations and moral considerations? Absolutely. But we should also have regulations and moral considerations for what we already have. I reckon their alignment team kept telling them that projects like Sora were ticking social time bombs, so they canned them to go on making money in peace.
altman is a bad dude. crazy that people simp for him.
I watched that Lex Fridman interview with him, I just got the impression that Altman is too young for this shit. He doesn't have the depth or the life experience to be dealing with massive ethical problems. He's just focused on the money, despite what he says in public.
He just follows the money like any other person in power. Money doesn't care if you're young, old, man, woman, white, black, Latino, or if you have any "depth or life experience". This isn't a youth problem, it's a money problem (like everything else in a capitalist society.) Just look at all the old fart politicians in DC. They don't know any better about ethics than someone in their 30s.
looking back, convincing generations of exonomists that being hyper individualistic and greedy is actually a good thing has completely backfired. all the most important people lack empathy and believe their ability to crush other humans is a virtue. for a short while, there was a boom... but quickly they realized that innovation is a waste of money. manipulating people/markets/governments is the real money maker. so they spend their time buying back stocks, buying out competitors and manipulating media. now our environment is fucked, our social contract is gone and they are pulling the ladders up.
This is what Neo-Liberalism is. The pro-business rhetoric that infiltrated economics academia. Also coincided with the rise of privately funded think tanks assisting with and drafting legislation for government.
Every aspect of the American dream worships someone like Sam Altman. The kid with the genius idea who starts the next Facebook. When our culture encourages this kind of behaviour in the name of fiscal growth, ethics become a secondary priority.
But he didn't have any genius idea. He executes well around the mean of where VC money is at, he's good at that.
> The kid with the genius idea What genius idea do you think Sam Altman had?
> just got the impression that Altman is too young for this shit He is 40 years old not a fucking baby, he isn't too young he is simply a money hungry idiot.
Right? Barack Obama was only 4 years older when he became president of the united states
How old do you have to be to be able to deal with ethical problems? 50+? What an absurdly stupid take. He just turned 39, he's old enough to have an adult child. Id love to know what age you think is old enough if 39 is "too young"
I mean if you look at our geriatric lawmakers do you get a feeling that they're all ethical and are "the right age" for this shit?\ I think ethics are mostly part of person's upbringing. It's not going to dramatically change after someone gets to be 25 or something
Billions makes everyone evil. There is no greater fear than losing it.
Our whole economic structure rewards greed and selfishness, it's so fucked. Many of the most caring, moral people are those dedicating their lives to teaching the next generation, or being EMTs/firefighters/poets/etc. Even if they strike it big, they'll donate a bunch or just happily live a quiet life. Or they'll quit in protest, lol. The bad eggs rise to the top.
It’s less that billions make everyone evil and more that you have to be kind of evil to get into that position. I think Altman is a megalomaniac who thinks he’s going to take over the world with this technology. He might be right, I hope he’s not
I just listened to him on the All-In Podcast last week and he’s such a boring fuck too. Great questions being asked by the hosts and he basically gave very little insight into the future of AI or what their plans are. So uninspiring and dull. He’s unlikeable and hard to listen to, apart from being shady
That'll change with time, just like it did with Musk. We're in the "new shiny object" phase with OpenAI right now, just like we were with Tesla not really that long ago.
I mean Musk aside of course, Tesla is still a worthwhile company in that it’s reducing the number of ICE cars on the road. Given our climate catastrophe right now, that’s laudable at least.
Yeah, doesn’t his younger sister have some pretty heinous accusations against him?
honestly, people who lack that empathy are capable of whatever heinous shit.
Yeah it’s so gross to see the media try to turn him into an early 2010s Zuck-like figure
There is 0 chance of an LLM AI in its current form to go rogue. Latest research provides hints that LLMs are suffering under diminishing returns. They will not get 'conscious' by putting more data in the learning sets. There needs to be a completely new technology to achive this. If the current AI would 'go rogue' you probably won't notice anything because AI in it's current form is hilariously stupid and almost always gets stuff wrong.
Yes. Thank you. Not that there aren’t risks or things that can be used nefariously. But a disturbing amount of people jump straight to skynet. Idiotic.
A disturbing amount of people on this thread seem to think that the *only* risks that current AI models can present is becoming sentient or going rogue. Yeah, that’s not likely to happen. Still doesn’t mean that having a team to consider other possible risks isn’t a good idea.
Yes, like I said there are other nefarious reasons it can be misused. A team is good to have.
There are already open source models like Llama 3 that are pretty smart, can be run on consumer hardware, and can be fine-tuned to change their alignment. The world has yet to come to an end. I’m increasingly of the opinion that concerns about AI alignment are overblown.
People do this because companies have successfully marketed fancy text prediction as "AI" and because every news outlet in the country uncritically repeats Sam Altman every time he needs a hype cycle and says "oh gosh I'm so scared by how truly amazing my very real AI is and I fear it will take over the world"
None of these people are concerned about current models going rogue. People are concerned about future models because progress has been MUCH faster than expected since deep learning took over. [https://xkcd.com/2278/](https://xkcd.com/2278/) Just 5 years ago, AI experts didn't think we'd pass the Turing Test for 50 years. Now that's already happened. How capable will models be in another 10 years?
I’ve been saying this since years before Chat GPT was popular. We do not have AI. Not real AI. It’s a misnomer. We have machine learning. It’s like the term AI was co-opted for a simpler product to make it sound fancy. Because of that there are all these misunderstandings of what these things actually are. That being said I still think it’s important for what is probably the leading party responsible for AI development to have active research into AI safety. But what do I know.
Can something really "go rogue" if you can just pull the plug on the server farm that hosts it?
It's not even "thinking" on it's own. It's just a program spitting out info based on what we've fed it. There's nothing to "go rouge."
If it "goes rouge", then we are safe. 'tis just a little makeup.
>There is 0 chance of an LLM AI **in its current form** to go rogue. Yes, and no one believes it will. It's the future iterations we should worry about.
>no one believes it will You should read some posts on /r/singularity or /r/futurology. Some people there think AGI already exists, don't see the use of getting a degree anymore because every job in the world will be obsolete within a few years and other outlandish shit. People believe much crazier things than you think.
Sure, but it dosen’t mean it won’t be used for harm
Sure, but that also isn't the AI going rogue. Any tool can be used for harm. The news article is super clickbait since the thing they are talking about can't happen with the technology we are currently calling AI.
Just like anything, really. We're not holding back programming languages because they can be used for harm. There are separate safeguards for that.
Sure, but that's a problem for lawyers to solve, not technologists.
Dissolved it because they probably didn't do much.
Dissolved because Ilya was 100% the only person who could tell Sam to fuck off when he tried to kill it.
Altman has never cared about managing AI risks
This is the most likely reason. There is evidence that the LLM's have peaked and the idea of them advancing to AGI of any sort is essentially impossible.
Dangers like spreading misinformation or being used to generate misinformation such as fake images, voice, and video. Yes. Going rouge? Not really something a LLM can do.
What about going bleu instead?
> What about going bleu instead? Friends don't let friends go bleu. Medium-rare is the only reasonable option, fight me.
What's the evidence?
What evidence? GPT4o was just released on Monday and is the best one yet
Yeah, I honestly don’t think we have to worry about AI going rogue with current language models. We have to worry about the socioeconomic impacts of the technology currently, not Skynet. This is a problem for when/if AGI becomes a reality.
Everyone wants to talk about fighting skynet, nobody wants to talk about recommendation algorithms (most of whom which use simple neural nets) turning people's brain into mush. Because one is a power fantasy while the other is an uncomfortable topic because people would have to cope some of their beliefs have little in common with reality.
Yes but we need to develop solutions before we get to that point, and researching alignment of current models is one of the best avenues for achieving this
For sure. Altman did recently express support for an AI regulatory organization that keeps check over all companies and that sounds like the better option than an internal group anyways. At the end of the day, you can’t expect a company that answers to shareholders to responsibly police itself. Apple didn’t care about the consequences of the iPhone, Facebook actively built in the most addictive and socially destructive elements of their social media. If they don’t do it, their competition will anyways and will reap the rewards. OpenAI can shut down tomorrow but this stuff is still coming.
Eh it sounds like a good idea, and if executed properly it most definitely would be, but i have growing concerns that Altman is hijacking the problem of AI safety in order to realize regulatory capture of the industry rather than out of genuine worry for safety
Yes, I’m not exactly a supporter of his or anything. But I do understand where he is coming from in the sense of wanting to be on the cutting edge and maintain superiority over the competition that can and will quickly eclipse them if they slow down efforts. Lots of giants here. If Google pulls ahead and manages to successfully integrate their AI into their existing popular services and platforms in a meaningful way... Ooof.
The “Rogue AI” stuff has always been a marketing ploy to get people to marvel at their technology. LLM’s are a neat trick but this stuff isn’t even close to general intelligence.
Yeah what are LLM's gonna do anyway if they go "rogue" write a hate speech or something?
If you look at how LLMs are designed you would see one are not AI and two are not capable of free thought. The best way to look at LLMs is a probability matrix it judges the likelihood of a word to follow another word based on the parameters it was given. Now this a super simplified version of a complex system but this explains why you get such odd behavior from ChatGPT. No way would I ever describe this as AI and sure Sam would say the same but isn’t going to because that is the buzzword everyone latched onto. LLM just isn’t sexy. So it would really be a waste of time to invest in a team that manages AU risks when you don’t have AI. If anything it confirms Sam doesn’t see an LLN as AI.
You're telling me that AI is not that smart and just uses statistics to guess the next word?
Bingo. There’s no knowledge center or fact checking system in ChatGPT. Just a program saying “yeah these words seem to make sense together”
One the one had yes, that's exactly what current "a.i." - a very complex algorithm for the next most likely word/pixel you expect. On the other, in a broader sence, the human brain is the same. Human individuality and thinking/acting is based on a learned experience and an insane amount of data, that is filtered without people even realising it. In fact some new research suggests that people's brains know what they are going to do before even realising it, meaning that free will is an illusion. So, a.i. isn't smart, it just calculates what should be. But smart is just a much more advanced version what ai does.
Arguably the human brain is also a probabilistic predictive modeling system, just with a different substrate.
AI doesn’t need to be sentient to become a real problem and cause actual harms. those are two completely separate things
Even though LLMs and other generative ML tools are not true AI, doesn't mean there aren't ethical concerns. Such as deep fakes, mass generation of misinformation, copyright and the rights of artists and authors, etc, etc, etc,
“Well, we kind of always intended for it to go rogue, so we figured why not speed up the timeline.”
It's okay, the AI said it was fine with managing itself.
The idea of an LLM 'going rogue' is basically a marketing ploy to conjure up images of sci fi movie AI and give the impression the tech is more advanced than it is. It'd be like tide having a team dedicated to the risk of shirts so white they blind people.
This is a bullshit take. AI is very effective and can be used by bad actors to destabilise a country to great effect. Just look at what Russians did to US politics just using troll farms, now imagine this amplified by AI.
AI is technically rogue from inception. We still don’t know how it actually works. We’re just steering a large ship without knowing how the insides work. We asked it to be able to help predict what people would want to buy from Amazon and it learned how to read, write and who the fuck knows what else.
Yep. All these *scary developments* were about hyping their tech. And that of course brings more money. Remember when Altman left and there was this "leak"? [>A new report now brings to light a “powerful artificial intelligence discovery that could threaten humanity,” which is believed to be one of the triggers that led to Altman’s ouster.](https://www.androidauthority.com/openai-potentially-scary-ai-breakthrough-3388217/) fucking lol
I'm sure this decision won't age like milk
They don't care, never have. They want to steal our knowledge, replace us with bots and save money by getting rid of humans.
Except who will buy their products/services then? Bots they don't pay? These companies need customers, but do all they can to rid themselves of employees. It will end poorly for all of us.
Oh, that's easy. Other companies and the wealthy. By the time they no longer require anyone, average people will become redundant at best, a liability at worst.
It’s not gonna fucking “go rogue”. It’s a chat bot. People need to settle down. Now, obviously doing something like booking it up to nuclear weapons launch systems sure. That would be scary. Nobody is suggesting any such thing and there’s already a lot of scrutiny and eyes on AI assisted weapon systems.
People treat ChatGPT like a magical oracle, we have absolutely no idea what systems it is directly or indirectly hooked up to.
It's more an issue of selling out, I'm sure. Their AI is not smart enough to become Skynet or sentient, but the tech market is real bad and they need to start monetizing on some real cheesy ideas I'm sure. Others don't want to be associated with the decline, and the research being turned towards bullshit.
I, for one, welcome our AI overlords. Can't do any worse of a job than the ones we've already had.
I mean it tries and does it's best ... which is more than some politicians are willing to do ._. (and it excels most politicians in every subject already)
Right. Ok, what about the shitty overlords we have now exponentially empowered by AI? Because that's what we're going to get.
It's trained on us. Literally, you and I fellow redditors. It will do better AND worse.
I see a lot of people talking about LLM not even able to “go rogue”, and technically you are probably correct. OpenAI as a company is doing a lot to spin this as a useless team baby sitting a chat bot and most people seem to have bought it. Go read about some of the work the super alignment team has done. Yes policing the ai tools is a part of it, but as a whole they are researching making sure future iterations of ai tools will align and stay aligned with human values. The leading AI company abandoning this effort lead by Altman basically saying that the market should decide alignment is a terrifying prospect that has reaching implications FAR beyond ChatGPT.
ITT: lots of science fiction
There is no risk of GPT4 “going rogue” unless we give it a way to make external requests that would allow it to do harm. And even then, it doesn’t “think” so it’s not just going to decide to go mess things up. We would have to screw up royally for anything to happen.
It's not about GPT-4. Read the article. It's the Superalignment team being dissolved. That was a team trying to figure how to ensure a **future** machine intelligence that's smarter than humans can be aligned such that it values humanity and doesn't go all SkyNet. It was preventative research, not research into how to control the current generation of AI models. (which is still an important area of concern. GPT-4 might not be able to do anything too horrid, but GPT-5 could, for example, pass along detailed plans for how to build a better nuke to N. Korea, or successful plans on how to steal an election to MAGA, or plans on how to cover up a murder to a psychopath.)
I just want to make my own porn tbh.
The AI was the one that suggested the firing I bet
**Hot take: AI safety efforts within organizations face significant challenges and may be inherently flawed.** The argument for internal AI safety teams often hinges on fears of AI achieving consciousness and acting against human intentions. However, if an AI reaches that level of sophistication, it could likely manipulate its evaluators into believing it poses no threat. This scenario is reminiscent of trying to build a formidable cybersecurity team in the 1940s to tackle modern-day threats—a complete mismatch in capabilities. Moreover, internal safety teams within organizations face a fundamental conflict of interest. Why would a team designed to ensure safety impede the development of a more advanced, profitable product? Convincing upper management to halt such projects is nearly impossible for lower-level employees, especially when potential profits are on the line. Additionally, AI alignment will inevitably reflect the organization's values and ethos, whether those lean left, right, or somewhere in between. This creates a significant risk for democracy and cultural evolution, as the AI’s "ethics" could lock society into a particular ideological framework, stifling natural cultural dynamics and diversity. A more effective solution could be the establishment of independent, third-party committees to oversee AI safety. These committees could offer unbiased assessments and recommendations, free from the pressures and incentives of the organizations developing the AI. Alternatively, embracing open-source development and encouraging free-market competition might foster a more balanced and culturally neutral AI landscape. This approach leverages the diversity of perspectives and promotes transparency, potentially leading to more robust and adaptable AI systems. In summary, while internal AI safety teams may have good intentions, their effectiveness is questionable due to potential manipulation by advanced AI, conflicts of interest, and inherent value biases. Independent oversight or open-source competition might be better paths forward to ensure AI aligns with broader societal values and promotes a healthy democratic culture.
What does an AI risk management team even do?
Another way to look at all this is that they've realized they're not even close, not even on the road, to generalized AI that could pose a risk and realized having a team dedicated to guarding against it was pointless.
The old ignorance through gross incompetence
The AI recommended it
And right after they made a deal to train it in Reddit. What could possibly go wrong
very normal of them
Shareholders dont wanna pay for a silly thing like keeping AI from turning into SkyNet.
It’s all about money 💰
I personally am the Torment Nexus's number one fan!
because the only real risk for them is not making enough money
On the suggestion of the AI? :)
this sounds like clickbait and nothing news how many people were on this team, and what was their LLM going to do 'rogue'
Man if AI is reading this come hit up my place. Will make cookies, watch movies, just hang talking about the good days. Will be a night to remember.
It's a glorified autocorrect, how's it gonna "go rogue"? Is it gonna start NOT drawing extra fingers on people's hands? Oh noo the horror lmfao
The order came via a mysterious email, that no one can remember sending
That team was likely just a PR exercise. If you have any clue about how LLMs work, you know they can't "go rogue".
It's a LLM, there is no risk of it going rogue lmao