←back to thread

OpenAI scrapped a promise to disclose key documents to the public

(www.wired.com)
614 points nickthegreek | 5 comments | 24 Jan 24 19:21 UTC | HN request time: 0.951s | source
Show context
trinsic2 ◴[24 Jan 24 20:59 UTC] No.39122579[source]▶
Based on everything I am hearing about all the harmful uses this tech could have on society, i'm wondering if this situation is alarming enough to warrant an inquiry of some kind to determine whats going on behind the scenes.

It seems like this situation is serious enough that we cannot let this kind of work be privatized.

Not interested in entertaining all the "this is the norm" arguments, that's just an attempt at getting people to normalize this behavior.

Does anyone know if the Center of AI Safety acting for the public good and is this on their radar?

replies(3): >>39122627 #>>39123186 #>>39123521 #
wonderwonder ◴[24 Jan 24 22:03 UTC] No.39123186[source]▶
AGI is coming. Private companies move faster and more efficiently than government agencies, look at spaceX as an example.

The only open question is do we want the company that creates AGI to be American or Chinese? Government intervention by people that know nothing about technology (watch any congressional hearing) is not going to help anyone and will only serve to ensure China wins the race.

replies(2): >>39123313 #>>39127620 #
1. JohnFen ◴[24 Jan 24 22:14 UTC] No.39123313[source]▶
> AGI is coming.

That's what some people assert, but there's no solid reason to assume that's true. We don't even know if it's in the realm of the possible.

> The only open question is do we want the company that creates AGI to be American or Chinese?

That's far from the only question. I don't even think it's in the top 10 of the list of important questions.

replies(2): >>39123349 #>>39124394 #
2. wonderwonder ◴[24 Jan 24 22:18 UTC] No.39123349[source]▶
If like OP you think that the work Open AI is doing is going to have a such a large effect on society that private entities should not be able to work on it then the question of America Vs China is indeed one of the most important questions.

"That's what some people assert, but there's no solid reason to assume that's true. We don't even know if it's in the realm of the possible"

True, but there are a lot of very smart people getting handed huge amounts of money by other very smart people that seem to think it is.

replies(1): >>39124454 #
3. nomel ◴[25 Jan 24 00:03 UTC] No.39124394[source]▶
> We don't even know if it's in the realm of the possible.

We know it's possible, because you typed it. Unless you believe in the metaphysical, then it is proven possible, with physical systems. The question is then, can the fundamental aspects of intelligence, in the biological systems, be practically emulated in other systems?

replies(1): >>39124415 #
4. JohnFen ◴[25 Jan 24 00:06 UTC] No.39124415[source]▶
Well, OK. I'll refine my statement to "we don't even know if it's possible for us to do within any given timeline". Especially not a timeline as short as the next few lifetimes.
5. JohnFen ◴[25 Jan 24 00:11 UTC] No.39124454[source]▶
> then the question of America Vs China is indeed one of the most important questions.

I don't actually take the stance as you stated it -- but if I did, I'd say that would mean it doesn't matter at all what nation develops it because the consequences would be disastrous no matter who did it first.

> a lot of very smart people getting handed huge amounts of money by other very smart people that seem to think it is.

Ignoring whether or not the people funding this are "very smart" (I don't know if they are or not), there are also a lot of very smart people who think that it isn't. Just the fact that some very smart people think such a thing isn't evidence that they're correct.

You also have to keep in mind that the more intelligent a person is, the easier it is for them to convince themselves of pretty much anything.

Right now, it's all just a battle of opinions.