- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
The easiest way to regulate the AI industry - and any industry for that matter - is to make the board personally liable for any crimes committed by their product. Not liable in a corporate sense with a fine and a slap on the wrist, when their AI hacks into a water reservoir and causes 500 million of flood damage, but in a 20 years in federal prison sense. Same goes for self driving cars, or any other computer, machinery or combination thereof where humans are placing trust in its safe and legal operation. There should be a corporate negligence law of sorts that says if a company is not following the law, industry best practice, including auditing and implementation of all safeguards, safety and other mitigations then they are exposed to criminal liability.
is it just me, or is 20 years for a rogue nuclear weapon seem a bit light?
Nah, it’s okay. Even Putin has it
Where’s the 20 year sentence for insider trading politicians?
These AI labs shouldn’t be private profit-seeking corporations. They should be more like publicly-funded nonprofit research institutions like Fermilab or something. It doesn’t seem possible to even talk about the labs without feeling like you’re increasing their value. That’s a problem. It’s also a problem that the research and announcements from the labs sound like publicity stunts. It’s hard to tell what’s genuine and what’s buzz for the press. There’s this arms race between the labs that’s negatively affecting seemingly everything. This should all just be put to an end. Step on the brakes. I don’t claim to know how to do that when the Constitution makes private property sacred, but, you know, just throwing the idea out there… The Constitution can always be changed.
Bro, stick with affordable housing and Healthcare. Everyone will want an automated military and will develop one till someone uses theirs to stop others from making their own. This is the new race for the bomb and it will escalate worse then nukes because the 1% thinks they wont kill themselves when they start the class genocide.
Here’s my idea: We arrest and execute all AI executives and lead developers, going by their definition of danger. Non-lead devs: 35 years in prison; AI boosters: 20 years in prison; both forced to only consume AI generated slop, the only place where we still temporarily allow the technology.
both forced to only consume AI generated slop
Let’s force them to eat food that looks like the food does on the AI generated menus, with the weird tire shrimp and all
only consume AI generated slop, the only place where we still temporarily allow the technology.
jfc full on torture.
maybe for musk and altman lol
I’d propose the opposite: 20 years in prison for anyone who opposes AI research.
Maybe not really 20 years, but small cut of profits (percentage!) to fund AI developement
I propose: anyone boosting AI on social media must be forced to not consume any human art. Prompted garbage only. If they violate it, whey will be suspended from social media for one month.
20 years in prison for anyone who opposes AI research.
think about the company you keep - ai fanboys like trump and musk and zuck.
think.
I don’t like them, but I think progress is more important.
progress
does it feel like progress to you? like, when you see they can’t create adequately secured testing, does that seem progressive? does grok undressing children seem like progressive technology?
just because something is growing in complexity does not mean it’s progress. and again, look at the adherents selling it.
and the warnings coming from people who left the companies.
and the cost of power, and water, gpus, ram, etc., - does that seem like things are progressing in a manner you want to see continue?
progress is a funny word here.
Better idea. Let’s make it a capital offense. Call it “treason against mankind.”
That would be interesting, as it’s headed in the direction of “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity”, but those tend to be international standards, and the US regime trying to attack and destroy these courts.
I don’t really want to get off on a political tangent. I’m talking about how we should handle these things, not how the current admin would handle them.
I use this internationalist language because it’s the only language that really captures the magnitude of the crime. We are a species that dominates this planet entirely due to our intelligence. We aren’t the fastest. We aren’t the strongest. We have neither sharp talons or fangs. We produce no poison or other biological defense mechanisms. The one thing and the only thing that has let us as a species control this world are our minds.
This is the context that needs to be considered when contemplating the ethics of superintelligent AI. I don’t care how good your control measures are. This is the lesson from every ancient tale involving genies and other beings of great power bound. This is the conclusion of the whole academic field of AI alignment and safety. You can never control something more intelligent than you are. If you think you can, you’re a fool. I don’t care what incentives you give it. I don’t care how much you air gap it. I don’t even ultimately care if it’s conscious and has a sense of self. It is simply not possible to ever control a machine beyond a certain level of capability. Any way you can think to control it, it can think of a way to work around. (I know some folks bristle at the words “think”, but frankly there’s no practical way to talk about these systems without using anthropomorphized language.)
If someone creates a superintelligent AI, they are not summoning a powerful servant. They are effectively creating a new species, one that will have its own motivations (even if just fulfilling its given instructions in dangerous and unpredictable ways.) And that competitor will operate in the exact same niche we do - physically helpless but still able to dominate the world through intelligence.
I just can’t see doing this as anything other than betraying your own species. You’re creating something that has the potential, even if just a small potential, to drive your own species to extinction. You care so little for your fellow human beings that you’re willing to gamble the lives of not only everyone alive now, but all the future generations of humans yet to be born. Such an act is an unforgivable sin, a moral abomination. I do not even have the language to express how deeply evil it is for a human to create something with superhuman intelligence. It is quite literally treason against the human race. And the traditional penalty for normal treason is death.
In my mind, if you do this, you are literally a traitor to the entire human race. You deserve to hang for this. Think about how we tried the Nazis at Nuremberg. And they only tried to commit genocide against a few racial and social groups. We’re talking about someone with such complete disregard for their fellow human that they are willing to risk human extinction for the sake of making a buck. I’m generally opposed to the death penalty. I don’t support it for ordinary murderers. But this? I’m sorry, but the penalty for treason against your own species should be death. If you are such an inhuman monster that you would gamble with the lives of two billion children? You need to hang for that. And I don’t care how many fools we have to string up to prevent this. I don’t care if it’s thousands. I for one really like humanity, regardless of all our flaws. And there is very little I would not support to protect our own existence.
I have no idea if LLMs can ever really reach that level of threat. I have no idea how much of the models that are causing the hacks and issues now can really ever become a physical threat to human life. But I do know that we simply cannot allow anyone to build superhuman AI. (Again, ignoring for now whether existing models can ever actually reach that.) The existence of anything on this planet more intelligent than us is a threat to all of us. It is such an existential threat, that there is almost no action I wouldn’t take to prevent it. I would fight a nuclear war to prevent the creation of such an abomination. It’s one of the few cases where starting a nuclear war is actually a rational choice.
LLMs can’t and they don’t know what can, it’s entirely bullshit. They don’t understand “intelligence” or “sentience” or “sapience” or generally how the brain works. These are business bros talking about math nerds while referring to neurobiology (which is entirely outside their field). The domain of brain science is impressive, but very far from mapping out the unknowns, it’s not even close.
Which is to say that they can’t replicate something that they can’t understand at the required level of understanding. The brain is not understandable yet. Which is to say that the story that there’s some linear ramp up possible to “climb” to “AGI” and “ASI” and whatever bullshit term they come up with – that entire story is bullshit. At most, it’s old science fiction.
Completely off-topic comment. None of this matters to what we’re talking about. Something doesn’t have to be sentient, sapient, or intelligent in a human way to be capable of demonstrating unpredictable, novel, and incredibly powerful behaviors. A steam engine is non-sentient, but it vastly exceeds human capabilities in certain applications. It’s no different for LLMs. You can stop talking about sentience. That’s not what we’re talking about here.
Discussions of consciousness are off topic in these conversations. We’re discussing the threat posed by LLM-based systems, not whether they deserve rights.
That’s not what the AI bros are promoting and selling.
And, in general, aiming a huge data-center full of GPUs at something is going to be powerful.
I am not threatened by an endless avalanche of AI slop.
How about you propose life without parole for the CEOs, Bernie boy?
Considering people have already tried to develop missiles and other systems with Anthropic and other AI systems it seems like this is warranted and on point with the rogue nuclear power. It can be used by anyone to potentially develop mass deadly weapons.
https://apnews.com/article/yemen-houthis-anthropic-ai-missiles-9b20934e031ff3d99dd8bb49d85d97a9
I’m sure Bernie has good intentions but this is exactly what Altman and Amodei want and why they’re constantly shouting how dangerous AI is.
Any AI startup can then be labeled as developing artificial superintelligence. Not them though, they’re working together with the government.
If AI is so dangerous it needs to be immediately banned. The only allowed usage (If any) is research and it is heavily restricted, with heavy oversight from multiple governments. Otherwise its just bullshit
This plays into the big corps’ plans.
Ideally they’d like self-regulation. If this isn’t feasible (for example, because the public hates data centers and AI slop) their next best option is government regulation ASAP, because it is likely to be ineffective as written by our current government, and enable them as “too big to fail/too big to care” while any startups are suppressed.
But it’s not just me saying it. https://shellypalmer.com/2023/06/ai-the-unseen-threat-and-the-agi-smoke-screen/
From the AI industry’s point of view, if regulators say no to self-regulation, the next best thing would be governments imposing regulations ASAP. Inept government regulation (and that is what we are likely to get) would practically ensure that big tech stays big and small companies are shut out of the AI innovation race because big tech is in a much better position to “game” any rules regulators might impose. […]
There are probably less biased sources out there – this author is the CEO of an AI consulting company – but i think they’re right.
Thats why I say take it away from them completely. If the big dogs can’t handle it, no one gets it. Or its regulated to the point thats its profit us worthless
It is not. They are spouting this lie and prompting their models to go rogue because they want to be the only trusted company that can “handle them”. It’s all about control and creating a monopoly.
I believe there is truth in both sides of this argument.
This is lemmy, balanced takes are not allowed.
Yeah but neither of those sides are in favor of the regulatory capture monopoly that liberals always think is a good idea.
That has about as much to do with reality as me believing I sing well in the shower.
Thankfully it’s not so dangerous
“I resigned from Anthropic today… Neither company is acting responsibly. They are racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives. The people building AI earnestly believe that it could kill us all by the end of the decade. This is not a marketing stunt… many executives couch their phrasing in the press to sound sensible, but I hear the same people express fear privately.”
Jacob Coxen senior researcher at Anthropic, previously at OpenAI
“Jacob is correct here — we really do earnestly believe AI could kill all humans. I personally think it is >10% within the next decade. I believe Anthropic is trying its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and are not clearly on track to.”
Evan Hubinger, Anthropic alignment lead
I wouldn’t say that, the amount of vulnerabilities it’s discovering (and capable of exploiting) is frightening
This is such a wild take to be getting this many upvotes. If nothing happened in LLM development from this day forward they’d still be absurdly dangerous: both in an information security context and a social engineering context.
Lemmy is absolutely head in the sand about LLMs and it is wild. You can dislike LLMs and acknowledge their capabilities [and limitations] at the same time.
You and I are the only ones apparently.
LLMs entering the world have revealed two very different types of crazies and I’m starting to think they’re everywhere. It’s quite tiring to have to constantly say “no they’re not useless” and “no they’re not super god” instead of engage with an actually interesting discussion.
I don’t really understand why lemmy thinks what it thinks on this one. To me it’s undeniable that it’s improving fast and it’s capable today of replacing a great many current job roles. Putting our heads in the sand isn’t going to make it go away.
I’m down with that.
Plus OpenAI’s IPO has been delayed due to the hype not being favorable enough, so it’s time to put on the brakes so that AGI can remain just around the corner for a little while longer.
That said, I do think Bernie’s idea of making the public voting stakeholders in AI companies is interesting. Existential threats notwithstanding, AI is having a significant impact in a lot of ways and the public interest should be represented. Though in practice I doubt that you’ll get the entire public voting in any meaningful direction so that 50% might not make any effective change.
I get your point, but I also argue “no it’s not.” The AI bros want to lie about how their super-special autocomplete is the most dangerous of all without any consequences. Good luck getting any employees to willingly substantiate your claims when 20 years in prison is on the line.
Even better, if they try to hack another company and claim their AI did it on its own, they get treated like a private company who decided to perform an unsanctioned nuclear test.
Make it dangerous for them to claim they’re dangerous.
Okay, fair, it’s not the ONLY reason they claim it’s dangerous. Obviously marketing is a large part of it. But they sure as hell would both like a duopoly setup enforced by LAW for themselves. Well at this point, I guess quadropoly? I doubt Google or Musk would give up their seats at the table. But anyone making an AI better or cheaper than the established players, would be deemed dangerous. Those working with the DoD would of course not be considered dangerous. Foreign models? Absolutely dangerous, restrict access as much as possible, especially to open weight ones.
this will only hurt the us further, many will simply build outside of america.
So what? What good has having AI “built” in the US done us?
Several communities have grouped together to protest the efforts. In face of a common enemy and all that. That’s the one good thing to have come out of all this bullshit; some class camaraderie that crosses the lines of political parties.
That’s not me saying that it wouldn’t have been better had this bullshit never come around.
Fine, let them waste money and effort on garbage.
I wouldn’t be sure he has any good intentions.
Trump wants no AI regulation.
This is just the opposite of that which is what usually works for opposition politicians.
Reducing Bernie to the “opposite politician”, well that’s definitely a take for the ages.
Not them though, they’re working together with the government.
Isn’t there a law for them who plan and prepare to grab the power? I mean, that’s what this Altman is doing all the time. Has been doing for at least 2 years now.
There are people facing weed sentences with harsher time than developing rogue nuclear weapons
Imagine getting thrown into the oubliette for growing Girl Scout Cookies next to the roses.
Americans are INSANE about how much the want criminals punished, in CA a guy got a life sentence for stealing a pizza when we tried to have a ‘‘three strikes your out’’ law that automatically gave life sentences at any third conviction which is fucking crazy in a state with tack on laws to the point you can get convicted of 10+ crimes on almost every single infraction, if you commit a felony with a pen or pencil in your pocket, that’s possession of a lethal weapon! it’s absurd. it’s still on the books the three strikes law, but it’s unenforceable because apparently having 60% of your population in prison for life is not a great plan for a civilization.
America has Private Prisons + Slavery is literally legal in the US for those in Prison.
As usual, it’s performative moralism hiding the real reason: $$$.
Performative moralism is a neat term to describe that part of the equation.
Automatic life sentence is too much, maybe we can agree on an automatic 15 year sentence?
Also, 60% of the population committing felonies is insanity.
it’s really easy to make 60% of your population commit a felony. you just continue to pass laws with the assumption that draconian punishments deter crime. and you keep making lesser and lesser crimes felonies, and punishments harsher, and you can have judges who just want to funnel people into prison to fund their own personal investments. it also helps to have corrupt cops that want to make those felony collars to get promotions and raises. cops literally train each other to escalate things to felonies or find felony charges where clearly none should exist like calling a box cutter a ‘gravity knife’ and charging a felony and if that person isn’t hiring a quality lawyer the public defender with 600 cases says ‘you have 15 min of my time for this case, I glanced at it, I recommend you take a plea deal, our time is up, what’s your decision?’
Hey, you’re spot on with your example. I got arrested for a pocket knife which the officer managed to forcefully fling open and the charge was possession of a weapon in the 4th degree (“gravity knife”), a class A misdemeanor. I got a public defender, who got me a plea deal of 30 hours community service and not getting arrested for a year to get the case dismissed without a conviction. They also tried to claim I drove drunk, but alas I blew a 0.0000 on their breathalyzer, so that was a fail.
NYPD officers got caught on a massage board explaining in detail how to claim any knife at all could be called a gravity knife to get better arrest records for promotions, that’s why I used that example.
Side note, a judge finally ruled that “gravity knives” are legal in NY in 2017, so that particular “gotcha” is not a thing anymore.
Murica!
got to have stable source of slave labour
Well, they were probably trying to develop that weed into rogue nuclear weapons.
Wouldn’t work. You’ll get blasted high, but what the missing is the mushroom
Yeah that’s another drug.
That stuck out to me too. Who knew AK-47 and Sour Zzzkittles carried more prison time than enriched Uranium. To be fair, they’ll include a bunch of other charges for both scenarios.
TIL, developing nuclear weapons is only 20 years in prison.
Detonation is another ten.
Possessing a zine is 50.
So you’re saying I could get out before my retirement?
Ikr, I chose the wrong profession
It’s not illegal to develop nuclear weapons. It’s illegal to endanger people with nuclear materials, though
Bernie falling for the trap. The AI companies want regulatory capture. They have NO moat otherwise.
If those comps are breaking laws, they need to be prosecuted for that. We don’t need new laws that can be exploited by the billionaires.
his recent spate of “demanding laws” with AI seems odd, as if it was benefiting them.
Yeah in my view (not US but applies regardless of country) the better thing would be to beef up court capacity then start prosecuting the absolute buggery out of anyone who uses, or negligently allows, a model under their control to commit crimes.
If you’re the master of a ship, your responsibility doesn’t end when you set the autohelm. Same with models in my view.
