• lily33@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    competition too intense

    dangerous technology should not be open source

    So, the actionable suggestions from this article are: reduce competition and ban open source.

    I guess what it is really about, is using fear to make sure AI remains in the hands of a few…

    • thehatfox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, this the setup for regulatory capture before regulation has even been conceived. The likes of OpenAI would like nothing more than to be legally declared the only stewards of this “dangerous” technology. The constant doom laden hype that people keep falling for is all part of the plan.

      • lily33@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think calling it “dangerous” in quotes is a bit disingenuous - because there is real potential for danger in the future - but what this article seems to want is totally not the way to manage that.

        • foggy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It would be an obvious attempt at pulling up the ladder if we were to see regulation on ai before we saw regulation on data collection from social media companies. Wen have already seen that weaponized. Why are we going to regulate something before it gets weaponized when we have other recent tech, unregulated, being weaponized?

    • Heresy_generator@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s also about distraction. The main point of the letter and the campaign behind it is slight-of-hand; to get the media obsessing over hypothetical concerns about hypothetical future AIs rather than talking about the actual concerns around current LLMs. They don’t want the media talking about the danger of deepfaked videos, floods of generated disinformation, floods of generated scams, deepfaked audio scams, and on and on, so they dangle Skynet in front of them and watch the majority of the media gladly obsess over our Terminator-themed future because that’s more exciting and generates more clicks than talking about things like the flood of fake news that is going to dominate every democratic election in the world from now on. Because these LLM creators would much rather see regulation of future products they don’t have any idea how to build (and , even better, maybe that regulation can even entrench their own position) than regulation of what they’re currently, actually doing.

    • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m going to need a legal framework to be able to DMCA any comments I see online in case they were created with an AI trained on Sara Silverman’s books

      • lily33@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Since I don’t think this analogy works, you shouldn’t stop there, but actually explain how the world would look like if everyone had access to AI technology (advanced enough to be comparable to a nuke), vs how it would look like if only a small elite had access to it.

        • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          We could all do our taxes for free. Fix grammatical errors. Have a pocket legal, medical advice. A niche hobby advisor. Pocket professor. A form completion tool. All in one assistant especially for people who might not know how to navigate a lot of tasks in life. Or we could ban it because I fear maybe someone will use it to make memes. Lots of lazy articles convinced me the AI sky is falling

        • photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Okay, well, if everyone had access to an AGI, anyone could design and distribute a pathogen that could wipe out a significant portion of the population. Then again, you’d have the collective force of everyone else’s AI countering that plot.

          I think that putting that kind of power into the hands of everyone shouldnt be done lightly.

          • Hanabie
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            There are papers online on how to design viruses. Now to get funding for a lab and staff, because this is nothing like Breaking Bad.

          • Rayspekt@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            You still can’t manufacture it. Your comparision with nukes is actually a good example: The basic knowledge how a nuke works is out there, yet most people struggle in refining weapon-grade plutonium.

            Knowledge is only one part in doing something.

          • lily33@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I would say the risk of having AI be limited to the ruling elite is worse, though - because there wouldn’t be everyone else’s AI to counter them.

            And if AI is limited to a few, those few WILL become the new ruling elite.

            • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              And people would be less likely to identify what AI can and can’t do if we convince ourselves to limit our access to it.

              • subignition@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                People are already incompetent enough at this when there’s a disclaimer in front of their faces warning about gpt.

                We’re seeing responses even in this thread conflating AGI with LLMs. People at large are too fucking stupid to be trusted with this kind of thing

          • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Since when does AI translate to being able to create bacteria and stuff?

            If having the information on how to do so was enough to create pathogens, we should already have been wiped out because of books and libraries.

            • photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You can’t type “How do I make a pathogen to wipe out a city” into a book. A sufficiently advanced and aligned AI will, however, answer that question with a detailed list of production steps, resource requirements and timeline.

              • HubertManne@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                this requires special materials like enzymes and such. It would much easier to restrict access to those. Now true this godlike ai could go back to show you how to make all the base stuff but you need equipment for this like centrifuges and you will need special media. Its like the ai telling you how to make a nuke really. Yeah it could star you off with bronze age metal smithing and you could work your way up to the modern materials you would need but realistically you won’t be able to do it (assuming again you restrict certain materials)

          • serratur@lemmy.wtf
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re just gonna print the pathogens with the pathogen printer? You understand that getting the information doesn’t mean you’re able to produce it.

            • Touching_Grass@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              I need an article on how a 3d printer can be used to print an underground chemistry lab to produce these weapons grade pathogens

              • testfactor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I know how to build a barn. Doesn’t mean I can do it by myself with no tools or materials.

                Turns out that building and operating a lab that can churn out bespoke pathogens is actually even more difficult and expensive than that.

          • Kichae@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Let’s assume your hypothetical here isnt bonkers: How, exactly, do you propose limiting people’s access to linear algebra?

      • Hanabie
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        You can google how to make a nuke. Of course, you’re gonna get your hands on the plutonium, which is something even countries struggle with.

        • Rayspekt@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Then I’ll ask AI how to obtain plutonium, checkmate.

          But by that point I might just ask the all-knowing AI how I can achieve what I want to with the nuke and cut out the radioactive middle man. Unless the AI tells me to build a nuke, then it’s nuke time anyway.

          • Hanabie
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The point I was trying to make is, all the information about viruses and nuclear bombs are already readily available. AI doing the googling for you will not have an actual impact, especially considering what else you’ll need to make it all work.

            I would assume you get the fear of AI from the news media. Understandable, they have a vested interest in keeping you afraid. AI is gonna steal their ad revenue, when you won’t have to visit their shitty websites anymore.