Thread

1. uxcolumbo · 1790629395 · focus · HN ↗

   100%. First stealing content from creators and pirating TBs of books. And now this. Baffles my mind that these labs can just get away with their 'rogue' agents trying to hack into other systems.

   Imagine if a human did that. FBI would be knocking on their door.

   Why are there zero consequences for these labs?

   1. andsoitis · 1790629637 · focus · HN ↗

      > Why are there zero consequences for these labs?

      Because they are seen as at the forefront of the next revolution in society and they’re not adversarial towards the US government.

      Bluntly: anticipated net huge positive for the US as a whole.

      1. popalchemist · 1790630328 · focus · HN ↗

         not adversarial in obvious ways

         but they are literally trying to build a superpower that exceeds the impact of the atomic bomb in an extragovernmental manner.

         1. CamperBob2 · 1790631131 · focus · HN ↗

            Somebody's going to build it. Not building it isn't an option. Would you rather the Chinese built it? The Russians? The Europeans? The Indians? A loose coalition of random hackers on the Internet, like the ones who build Linux?

            1. bgun · 1790631299 · focus · HN ↗

               At least random hackers seem to have codes of ethics.

               1. CamperBob2 · 1790631460 · focus · HN ↗

                  Well, they'd presumably be different hackers than the ones who work on Linux. We don't know what would motivate them. Maybe they'll do it because they consider the next stage of man's intellectual evolution to be too important to leave up to a couple of American companies and the Trump administration. Maybe they'll do it for the proverbial lulz.
            2. runarberg · 1790631414 · focus · HN ↗

               Logical fallacy, of the worst kind.

               Firstly artificial superintelligence is a science fiction, it does not exist and it cannot be built using existing technology.

               Second, plenty of stuff is possible to build, and is not built for one reason or another no matter how powerful. We never built our nukes in space for example. And there is exactly one reason why nukes in space was never built, and that reason is that we agreed not to.

               1. CamperBob2 · 1790631653 · focus · HN ↗

                  Firstly artificial superintelligence is a science fiction, it does not exist and it cannot be built using existing technology.

                  By what authority do you claim this? Your school of thought has a really shitty track record of late.

                  1. runarberg · 1790631798 · focus · HN ↗

                     The same authority that allows me to claim that teleportation transporters, hyperdrives, and holoemitters do not exist and cannot be built using existing technology.
            3. therein · 1790631519 · focus · HN ↗

               It is sad to see how many times this narrative will continue to work. Across generations, humanity learns no lessons at all.

               1. CamperBob2 · 1790631624 · focus · HN ↗

                  I'm being descriptive, not prescriptive. The "narrative" isn't intended to "work," except as a statement of fact.

                  1. goatlover · 1790644399 · focus · HN ↗

                     You're making a statement of "fact" about a futuristic technology that doesn't exist.
            4. true_religion · 1790631672 · focus · HN ↗

               Yes?

               What's wrong with what the Chinese have already built? It's not theoretical in that case. GLM, and Kimi are running on my infra right now, and that's something that I can never do with OpenAI's models.

               As for the others, what would be wrong about European AI? I'm not European, but I find them to be a continent of fine people, with strong ethical values, there's no reason they can't take the lead on this piece of technology while the US deals with its rather more pertinent electoral and healthcare issues.

               1. eithed · 1790688050 · focus · HN ↗

                  I think it was more tongue-in-cheek answer = not building torment nexus isn't an option! Also it's another narrative Americans are pursuing being the world police.
            5. bigstrat2003 · 1790632376 · focus · HN ↗

               > Somebody's going to build it. Not building it isn't an option.

               It turns out that is, in fact, an option. Even if someone else will do a bad thing, it does not make it acceptable for you to do said bad thing.

               1. jackb4040 · 1790643993 · focus · HN ↗

                  It's so funny that a tiny group of cultists from the Bay Area was really able to convince most of the smart people in America of this. It's not true. China isn't working on this at all. The only people who are trying to make a world-ending God-computer are americans.

                  Comparing it to nuclear weapons is even more ironic from the only nation to ever use nuclear weapons. They are terrified of other countries treating them the way they've been treated, even though there is no evidence this is of even remote interest to anyone outside their hyperreality.

            6. [deleted] · 1790632922 · focus · HN ↗

               [deleted]

            7. esafak · 1790634283 · focus · HN ↗

               Of course it is an option. There is no prize for being the first to cause a disaster.

               1. jimz · 1790643228 · focus · HN ↗

                  The prize is that you're the only person in the room with the expertise in the area when it comes to writing regulations.
               2. CamperBob2 · 1790700882 · focus · HN ↗

                  There is no prize for being the first to cause a disaster.

                  How do you think Trump has made more profit during his years in the Oval Office than he did in 30+ years of business before that?

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.