upvote
Yeah I think its possible that for many folks its the first time they're coming up on these concepts, and it troubles them in the same way that the concept of death troubles them (and me, to be clear!).

For me its as simple as watching how people talk, and seeing how in every single case whatever the next thing is, if you believe It, there is only ever justification of doubling down, doing more, going deeper, reducing any doubt. These are not scientists, they're business people and salespeople, and a few optimists having recently on paper solved all their worldly financial needs.

Even if one throws that aside, spending time exploring and building with the most state of the art LLMs is just as instructive. I'm watching the implementation - whats working is ML models trained on specific domains (not much different than 5+ years ago), and whats not working is a general model that humanity can let go to work on its own. Sit in front and observe ideas turn to the samey intellectual, high-syllable mush. Its productive, but not in any way that's promised.

reply
>> Even if one throws that aside, spending time exploring and building with the most state of the art LLMs is just as instructive. I'm watching the implementation - whats working is ML models trained on specific domains (not much different than 5+ years ago), and whats not working is a general model that humanity can let go to work on its own. Sit in front and observe ideas turn to the samey intellectual, high-syllable mush. Its productive, but not in any way that's promised.

Important point. LLMs were early on hailed as the first general-puprose AIs that can perform any task (remember "Sparks of AGI"?). Today they're increasingly promoted for specialised applications - coding, as a for instance.

reply
While there are some coding focused models (composer, for example), the majority of frontier models are pitched as general purpose. The coding harnesses for Claude and GPT are even being repurposed as general purpose knowledge work harnesses.
reply
Did you actually read the text? OPs are calling that Plan D.

They're proposing an alternative, which is a global brake on frontier AI research to keep the basilisk in its jar until we work out what we're dealing with and how to handle it.

reply
> whats working is ML models trained on specific domains (not much different than 5+ years ago), and whats not working is a general model that humanity can let go to work on its own.

As usual, AI skeptics are moving goal posts. Modern LLMs are on a completely different level in terms of how GENERAL they are vs anything pre-LLM. You can give it a completely novel puzzle and it will solve it. 5+ years ago you had to train NN to solve particular type of puzzle.

reply
Video link, as the link on the page is dead. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kErHiET5YPw
reply
This is hilariously true

> AI risk is string theory for computer programmers. It's fun to think about, interesting, and completely inaccessible to experiment given our current technology. You can build crystal palaces of thought, working from first principles, then climb up inside them and pull the ladder up behind you. People who can reach preposterous conclusions from a long chain of abstract reasoning, and feel confident in their truth, are the wrong people to be running a culture.

I understand how people running in the same scene fall into the echo chamber effect and get gulped into the cult, but why does everybody want to be a prophet?

reply
Theorizing about nuclear winter is somewhat similar, in the sense of being inaccessible to experiment. Does that mean we should disregard the possibility of nuclear winter?
reply
As with using the Orion drive for launch and landing on Erth is possible, test nuclear winter is certainly possible. But as with the former, you won't be very popular among the survivors (if any).
reply
Being a prophet is probably great until you suddenly find yourself building a fortified compound in Waco, Texas and purchasing black market full auto machine guns.
reply
Thank you for contacting Gunmetal Ranch, a legitimate 501(c). If your call is related to the class-action "most dangerous game" settlement, please hold for a cowpoke.
reply
> but why does everybody want to be a prophet?

Its not everyone building crystal palaces in their mind, they're all building fortresses. And they can't be wrong in their fortress or it breaks their world view which they cannot accept.

reply
deleted
reply
and upon rereading completely holds up technically we are still passing in massive data into simple networks giving no opportunity for introspection or recursive self improvement.
reply
>despite the incredible advances made in AI in the meantime

So the goalposts will be moved whenever necessary in that case?

No amount of incredible advances in AI will ever get skeptical HN commenters to take AI's implications seriously?

"The Gish gallops will continue until the nagging doubts have been silenced"

reply