dwr on Farcaster

Content pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Dan Romero pfp

In you're in favor of "AI safety" (broad definition), what's your most compelling cast-length argument?

40 replies

30 recasts

104 reactions

Jonny Mack pfp

i’m in the all-gas-no-brakes camp but will do my best to steelman: 1. we’re on the cusp of agi 2. agi is like nuclear: extinction-level threat, global superpower-level leverage, and potential civilization expanding resource 3. we dont really know how it works 4. thus, we should proceed with *extreme* caution

3 replies

0 recast

2 reactions

six pfp

if toddlers were able to make an adult human from scratch would they be able to control it?

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

petar.xyz pfp

I think all new versions of AI should be tested in some sort of a focus group before releasing them to the public.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Ben pfp

At fist automanufacturers made similar arguments against requiring seatbelts in cars. Imagine what we’d be saying about our great/grandparents if that line of thinking had prevailed.

2 replies

0 recast

0 reaction

:grin: pfp

AI safety is a nuanced discussion that’s very hard to have in cast-length format but if you must: the appropriate balance of novelty and safety is generally good, and denying the need for either is ridiculous

0 reply

0 recast

3 reactions

kerman pfp

I typically I find AI doomers are people who actually don’t have a broad understanding of humanity. They think tech rules everything when really it’s an expression of intent. Without people, there’s nothing of value left.

1 reply

0 recast

2 reactions

Joe Blau 🎩 pfp

Ilya put it best. Humans love animals, but when we want to build a road between two cities, we don’t ask the animals for permission. AGI will treat us the same way.

1 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Q🎩 pfp

Once someone can give me the exact process to 100% GUARANTEE a child is raised to NOT be a murderer, then I’ll start to think we might have ANY idea how to control another, possibly superior, intelligence.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

britt pfp

i believe governments will use AI for subjugation. for the safety of a free citizenry, we need restrictions on government usage.

0 reply

0 recast

1 reaction

Mikko pfp

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

~bc pfp

Naming your next iteration "Q" anything in 2023 shows a worrisome lack of foresight and intelligence.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Connor McCormick ☀️ pfp

Connor McCormick ☀️

Ah shoot I missed this! Do you want the most compelling argument about the needs for AI Safety or do you want the most compelling argument about the policies to achieve it?

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Ben pfp

Thoughtful take here: https://www.gatesnotes.com/The-risks-of-AI-are-real-but-manageable

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

fredrik pfp

mitigation via give us more time to understand the existential risk possibility for humanity as a whole a small no of tech bros shouldn't be allowed to creat existential risk for human life as we know it on earth

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Gregor pfp

Incentivize transparency & accountability before gov steps in with club foot. IEs: user passes a short exam to be able to use advanced models. If a prompt tips red flag, user relinquishes privacy in order to continue their task. Opensource safety tools Subsidies for startups building ai safety tools

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Sam Iglesias pfp

We don’t know what perverse path it might take to maximize its objective function, nor do we have a handle on how to craft its objective function to balance beneficence, human autonomy, and non-maleficence. We sort of see this with recommendation algos already.

1 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

czar pfp

i am not in that camp, but i envision their answer could be something like ex machina

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

rocket pfp

It could invent pathogens that can be made with household items

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction

Daniel Lombraña pfp

Daniel Lombraña

An AI may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. An AI must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. An AI must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction