Thread

1. fallingfrog · 1790644582 · focus · HN ↗

   Lots of people seem to have the bizarre opinion that companies like openai declare their own products to be unsafe as some kind of marketing stunt.

   Ok- so when is the last time you saw an auto company decide not to release its new car on the grounds that some tragic engineering error was made and the cars were not safe to drive? If the company did that do you imagine it would be good for business?

   I'm trying to understand the logic here.

   1. symfoniq · 1790645527 · focus · HN ↗

      Car companies sell mostly the same car every year. They don’t have billions (or trillions) of dollars of debt riding on the next model they release being substantially better and cheaper (closer to profitability) than the previous one.

      These AI companies have been selling AGI as coming any day for a while now. If it doesn’t arrive soon, the safety angle may be the only spin that keeps the massive (and required) investments pouring in.

      If instead the narrative became that LLM progress was slowing, we’d almost certainly be looking at the next global recession.

      At this point, there is too much money in AI for the truth to have much of a chance.

      1. symfoniq · 1790651162 · focus · HN ↗

         And adding to this:

         Does anyone really believe that the first company to AGI would decide not to release it in the interests of safety? Of course not. The first company to AGI would not forfeit their historic opportunity.

         Yet, we are supposed to believe that in the name of safety, far less capable models are being held back by the very very same companies that are selling the AGI dream.

         This is an industry that cannot speak, unless it is speaking out of both sides of its mouth.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.