Submitted by yottawa t3_127ojcy in singularity
What do you think? Practically speaking, I don't think this letter will have much effect. I don't think we should stop AI developments, but I think it would be good for us to talk openly about AI alignment and how we can make AI models better for everyone.
Silicon Valley's values aren't aligned with mine and those of a great majority of the world population, I can say this.
Silicon Valley values align with money and that is it.
Who's values are more important, yours or SV:s? Who decides which humans values are the best to align towards?
Is it my values? What if my values are detrimental to everyone else's wellbeing?
There is no way we can make everyone happy. Do we try to make as many people as possible happy? When is it justified to align an AI to the detriment of some? At what %?
About 1% of the general population are psychopaths. About 12% of corporate C-suite are psychopaths. It's their values that have a higher priority as of today.
GPT 4: Is Elon Musk's Fear of AI and LLMs Driven by Capitalism and the Threat to Luxury Markets?
As many of you know, Elon Musk has been quite vocal about his concerns regarding artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLMs). He's called for strict regulation and oversight, even going so far as to say that AI could be more dangerous than nuclear weapons. While the potential risks of AI are not to be taken lightly, I can't help but wonder if Musk's fears are influenced by his capitalist mindset and the potential threat AI poses to luxury markets like his own Tesla cars.
Think about it: one of the most significant concerns surrounding AI is its potential to displace jobs across various industries. As AI becomes more advanced, more people could find themselves out of work, and subsequently, with less disposable income. In such a scenario, purchasing luxury items like Tesla cars might become less of a priority for the average person.
This brings us to the broader implications of AI on wealth distribution and power dynamics. As a billionaire entrepreneur, Musk thrives in an environment where resources and power are concentrated among a select few. However, AI has the potential to democratize access to knowledge, resources, and decision-making. This could eventually lead to a more equitable distribution of wealth and power, which may not bode well for the ultra-wealthy, like Musk.
So, are Musk's concerns about AI and LLMs genuinely about the potential dangers they pose, or is there an underlying fear of losing control over his empire and the luxury market? While we can't say for sure, it's essential to consider all possible motivations when discussing such a complex and far-reaching topic.
What do you all think? Is Musk's fear of AI driven by capitalism and the potential impact on the luxury market, or is it solely based on the potential harm AI could cause? Let's have a thoughtful discussion in the comments below!
Musk is the least impressive person on that list, and media is making like he's the only one there.
No, it's something he's talked about for over a decade.
We, as a species, are unable to 'align' among ourselves. Whose values should AI adopt then?
It will be very difficulty for non westerners to accept an AI that only knows the western perspective
Wow, sure it was hard to read past 3 sentences in the tweet. Sam talks about a "democratic" process of alignment, where people can participate
Humans are extremely aligned compared to what's theoretically possible. We just generally focus on the differences rather than the similarities, because the similarities seem so obvious that we don't even consider them.
I will say i watched that interview he did with Lex real closely because i didn't know much about him. He seems more thoughtful and level headed than 95% of the people who could have wound up in his position. Small comfort i guess, hopefully that counts for something.
He is a true futurist and I wouldn’t be surprised if he lurked here sometimes
Is it even possible to "align" a system, if you can't reliably understand what is happening inside it? How can you be sure it isn't deceiving you?
We can't align a hammer to not hit your fingers, or a human to not become a criminal. Thinking a dynamic multi-contexual system will somehow become a paragon saint is ridiculous.
And no matter how many alignment training sets you have it all goes out the window as soon as someone needs a military AI to kill people and ignore those sets.
I certainly believe it's impossible to guarantee it's aligned for sure, but it's probably very possible to make it aligned 99.99% of the time with smart techniques to align them
Sort of. We do understand what is happening internally more than you might think. And we could further develop that. Or better develop a secondary ai that is used to determine what the main ai is thinking.
Could we not just hard code these models to constantly ask if they're behaving properly and doing what we want?
Perhaps we could have a democratic system we use to respond to those queries, to make sure they best represent us all.
If the system needs approval before it takes any actions at all, the system is going to be extremely slow and limited.
I don't mean that it would ask before every action, more so that it'd regularly ask if it was acting in the right way.
Ah, I get what you mean. I still don't think that necessarily solves the problem. It could be possible for a hypothetical artificial superintelligence to take actions that seem harmless to us, but because it is better at planning and prediction than us, the system knows the action or series of actions will lead to humanity's demise. But since it appears harmless to us, when it asks, we say, "Yes, you are acting in the correct way".
And we would trust the guys who sold out with alignment because...?
I do agree that there needs to be collaboration on this.
One caution though:
If all our alignment efforts are too similar, they might have overlapping weaknesses and blindspots.
I think a diversity of approaches is important.
And how are we supposed to make sure that this democratic process isn't undermined by those with more wealth/resources, in the way that our "democratic" country has been?? Won't the wealthy just hijack/corrupt the process for their own purposes the way they do to everything else?
How are human beings supposed to properly align AI when we can't even get our shit together and properly manage states or the country in general? People don't know what the fuck they're doing or the unintended consequences of their actions.
Very difficult to build an alignment data set that everyone agrees on
We should start developing agent Smith type of AI agents working for us, dealing with alignment.
How much will openai charge to use these alignment datasets per training epoch, and when can we got on the waitlist for it? (Investors can skip the line though, don't worry. Wouldn't want anyone to threaten their hegemony over their market)
I was the first one to say how dumb this idea was. Downvoted and argued with like fuck. My Linkedin posts had a better response though.
SkyeandJett t1_jef25bp wrote
Great measured response. Acknowledge the valid issues while ignoring the clearly ridiculous suggestion of pausing development.