←back to thread

AI 2027

(ai-2027.com)
949 points Tenoke | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
beklein ◴[] No.43572674[source]
Older and related article from one of the authors titled "What 2026 looks like", that is holding up very well against time. Written in mid 2021 (pre ChatGPT)

https://www.alignmentforum.org/posts/6Xgy6CAf2jqHhynHL/what-...

//edit: remove the referral tags from URL

replies(9): >>43572850 #>>43572964 #>>43573185 #>>43573413 #>>43573523 #>>43575079 #>>43575122 #>>43575183 #>>43575630 #
motoxpro ◴[] No.43572964[source]
That's incredible how much it broadly aligns with what has happened. Especially because it was before ChatGPT.
replies(2): >>43573807 #>>43576710 #
reducesuffering ◴[] No.43573807[source]
Will people finally wake up that the AGI X-Risk people have been right and we’re rapidly approaching a really fucking big deal?

This forum has been so behind for too long.

Sama has been saying this a decade now: “Development of Superhuman machine intelligence is probably the greatest threat to the continued existence of humanity” 2015 https://blog.samaltman.com/machine-intelligence-part-1

Hinton, Ilya, Dario Amodei, RLHF inventor, Deepmind founders. They all get it, which is why they’re the smart cookies in those positions.

First stage is denial, I get it, not easy to swallow the gravity of what’s coming.

replies(6): >>43574597 #>>43575158 #>>43575632 #>>43575654 #>>43575793 #>>43575851 #
hn_throwaway_99 ◴[] No.43575632[source]
> Will people finally wake up that the AGI X-Risk people have been right and we’re rapidly approaching a really fucking big deal?

OK, say I totally believe this. What, pray tell, are we supposed to do about it?

Don't you at least see the irony of quoting Sama's dire warnings about the development of AI, without at least mentioning that he is at the absolute forefront of the push to build this technology that can destroy all of humanity. It's like he's saying "This potion can destroy all of humanity if we make it" as he works faster and faster to figure out how to make it.

I mean, I get it, "if we don't build it, someone else will", but all of the discussion around "alignment" seems just blatantly laughable to me. If on one hand your goal is to build "super intelligence", i.e. way smarter than any human or group of humans, how do you expect to control that super intelligence when you're just acting at the middling level of human intelligence?

While I'm skeptical on the timeline, if we do ever end up building super intelligence, the idea that we can control it is a pipe dream. We may not be toast (I mean, we're smarter than dogs, and we keep them around), but we won't be in control.

So if you truly believe super intelligent AI is coming, you may as well enjoy the view now, because there ain't nothing you or anyone else will be able to do to "save humanity" if or when it arrives.

replies(3): >>43575869 #>>43583481 #>>43588198 #
achierius ◴[] No.43575869[source]
Political organization to force a stop to ongoing research? Protest outside OAI HQ? There are lots of thing we could, and many of us would, do if more people were actually convinced their life were in danger.
replies(1): >>43576208 #
hn_throwaway_99 ◴[] No.43576208[source]
> Political organization to force a stop to ongoing research? Protest outside OAI HQ?

Come on, be real. Do you honestly think that would make a lick of difference? Maybe, at best, delay things by a couple months. But this is a worldwide phenomenon, and humans have shown time and time again that they are not able to self organize globally. How successful do you think that political organization is going to be in slowing China's progress?

replies(2): >>43578481 #>>43583506 #
achierius ◴[] No.43578481[source]
Humans have shown time and time again that they are able to self-organize globally.

Nuclear deterrence -- human cloning -- bioweapon proliferation -- Antarctic neutrality -- the list goes on.

> How successful do you think that political organization is going to be in slowing China's progress?

I wish people would stop with this tired war-mongering. China was not the one who opened up this can of worms. China has never been the one pushing the edge of capabilities. Before Sam Altman decided to give ChatGPT to the world, they were actively cracking down on software companies (in favor of hardware & "concrete" production).

We, the US, are the ones who chose to do this. We started the race. We put the world, all of humanity, on this path.

> Do you honestly think that would make a lick of difference?

I don't know, it depends. Perhaps we're lucky and the timelines are slow enough that 20-30% of the population loses their jobs before things become unrecoverable. Tech companies used to warn people not to wear their badges in public in San Francisco -- and that was what, 2020? Would you really want to work at "Human Replacer, Inc." when that means walking out and about among a population who you know hates you, viscerally? Or if we make it to 2028 in the same condition. The Bonus Army was bad enough -- how confident are you that the government would stand their ground, keep letting these labs advance capabilities, when their electoral necks were on the line?

This defeatism is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The people have the power to make things happen, and rhetoric like this is the most powerful thing holding them back.

replies(1): >>43578760 #
1. eagleislandsong ◴[] No.43578760[source]
> China was not the one who opened up this can of worms

Thank you. As someone who lives in Southeast Asia (and who also has lived in East Asia -- pardon the deliberate vagueness, for I do not wish to reveal too many potentially personally identifying information), this is how many of us in these regions view the current tensions between China and Taiwan as well.

Don't get me wrong; we acknowledge that many Taiwanese people want independence, that they are a people with their own aspirations and agency. But we can also see that the US -- and its European friends, which often blindly adopt its rhetoric and foreign policy -- is deliberately using Taiwan as a disposable pawn to attempt to provoke China into a conflict. The US will do what it has always done ever since the post-WW2 period -- destabilise entire regions of countries to further its own imperialistic goals, causing the deaths and suffering of millions, and then leaving the local populations to deal with the fallout for many decades after.

Without the US intentionally stoking the flames of mutual antagonism between China and Taiwan, the two countries could have slowly (perhaps over the next decades) come to terms with each other, be it voluntary reunification or peaceful separation. If you know a bit of Chinese history, it is not entirely far-fetched at all to think that the Chinese might eventually agree to recognising Taiwan as an independent nation, but now this option has now been denied because the US has decided to use Taiwan as a pawn in a proxy conflict.

To anticipate questions about China's military invasion of Taiwan by 2027: No, I do not believe it will happen. Don't believe everything the US authorities claim.