Thread

1. dist-epoch · 1790611352 · focus · HN ↗

   HN'ers which complained that "OpenAI can't design a proper sandbox, it's so easy, why wouldn't you airgap the network"? will now be "this is outrageous, more software lock-in, walled garden, war against general compute, next year they will put it in your laptop"

   1. applfanboysbgon · 1790611999 · focus · HN ↗

      Where is the contradiction? There is a trivial solution that does not impinge on our freedoms, so why on Earth would the existence of the trivial solution that could be used to avoid the tyrannical solution justify accepting the tyrannical solution?

      1. bigyabai · 1790614782 · focus · HN ↗

         > There is a trivial solution that does not impinge on our freedoms

         The existence of Nvidia's optional watchdog chip does not in any way impinge upon your freedom to develop and test your own alternative.

         The problem is that OpenAI has ostensibly neglected their duty to safety, so Nvidia is stepping in to fix it since they're the "hard problem" people.

         1. jacquesm · 1790626034 · focus · HN ↗

            But... it wasn't a hard problem to begin with. Pull the plug. Strip out the radios. Done. Oh, you can't make it work that way? Well, then just too bad because any kind of other solution is going to be equivalent to something far more complex than the halting problem.

            1. bigyabai · 1790631759 · focus · HN ↗

               Nvidia can take those odds. Air gapping is not a realistic goal for the majority of these companies, and Nvidia isn't wrong for offering a turnkey mitigation option. People can do both, and whichever philosophy wins will win.

               1. jacquesm · 1790643626 · focus · HN ↗

                  They are not wrong in offering it but they are delusional if they think they can actually make it work.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.