Thread

1. bananaflag · 1790163465 · focus · HN ↗

   > Describing them as “superintelligence” or “rogue models” ascribes agency to products rather than to the companies building them. This framing markets these companies’ products as “superhuman” and, at the same time, helps the companies evade accountability for their actions.

   If someone discovered how to summon demons to aid them in robbing banks the main issue wouldn't be "but who has the responsibility for the crime, the human or the demon", it would be "OMG DEMONS".

   Seriously, I don't get what sort of world these people are living in.

   1. ForHackernews · 1790163699 · focus · HN ↗

      If I run a port scanner / vulnerability fuzzer pointed at your network that churns for days and eventually cracks something and breaks your system, would you be upset with me, or my bash loops?

      What if you tried to sue me for damages and my defense was, "Your honor, this was a highly advanced AI gone rogue, I couldn't possibly be held negligent, no one could have foreseen this - I accidentally summoned dark magiks from the silicon itself!"

      Note the point I'm making: I am not claiming LLMs are equivalent to a for loop, I'm saying that you can't evade moral and legal responsibility through technical obscurantism.

      A bomb wired to a sufficiently-complex RNG is still a bomb.

      1. pixl97 · 1790174868 · focus · HN ↗

         Let's pull back from the actions of a single actor here and look at AGI as a topic in general.

         If you make an AGI, what actions can an AGI take?

         If you answered "anything", good job, you're correct.

         The only winning move here is not to play the game at all. And yet we have actors all over the world, especially in the US trying to do just this.

         Now, lets imagine a future where one of the labs creates AGI and keeps it behind a safe firewall. The demon still exists. Lets say a group of armed men breaks in and steals the weights and turns them lose on the internet. Who is responsible now? The company that created it because they didn't shoot the armed robbers? The people that stole it and turned it loose?

         If it can run as a sovereign AI, what do you do then? Who are you going to sue? And when we get to the point that home hardware can make AI this complex? What does that world look like?

         What I am saying is the potential future impact of said AGI is far larger than any one organization or individual can bear. How much blood can you beat out of someone after they cause a trillion dollars in damage.

         Every idiot that sees AI labs wanting to slow down development as some way to ossify the field and keep it from the rest of us really doesn't see that this path contains real demons.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.