Thread

1. soundworlds · 1790232847 · focus · HN ↗

   Take out the word "AI", and this is simply an organization's (OpenAI's) products causing real damage to all of these platforms around the world.

   You want AI labs to pace? Simply hold them liable for their products.

   1. Zizizizz · 1790242134 · focus · HN ↗

      I wonder if Glock, Smith & Wesson, Sturmn, Ruger and Co. would start panicking if that were to happen.

      I agree they should though.

      1. petesergeant · 1790246676 · focus · HN ↗

         What do you see as the negligence angle for the gun makers here?

         1. Zizizizz · 1790253773 · focus · HN ↗

            I don't see an all encompassing one but I could see similar arguments being made in a courtroom around high capacity magazines. (I'm not saying I think the analogy is perfect, but there has been plenty of of lobbying that has stifled - to some - sensible gun regulation that could help reduce the severity of mass shootings. I still mostly fall on the side of the individual doing the action bearing mostly all of the responsibility but if the product you build makes it too easy to do awful things, I think there is some responsibility to go around.

            A better analogy may have been the troubles Meta has faced around child protections on their platforms. Technically the abuse and problems have stemmed from individuals too, but they've in many respects enabled the situation by failing to moderate or flag warning signs. OpenAI is failing to moderate the models in similar ways.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.