Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ExtraFun4319 t1_j6ex9nu wrote

>In the meetings, Altman told policymakers that OpenAI is on the path to creating “artificial general intelligence,”

If they get there, it won't be as a private company.

Why do I think this? Personally, I believe it's painfully obvious that once private AI organizations come anywhere near something resembling AGI, they'll get taken over/nationalized by their respective national governments/armed forces. OpenAI won't be an exception.

There is absolutely no reason why the US government/military would just sit there and watch a tiny group of private citizens create something that dwarves the power of nuclear weapons.

And no, I doubt the average US senator is up to date with what is happening in AI, but I'm almost positive that there are people in the government/military who are keeping a close eye on progress in this field, and I have no doubt that the gov/military will pounce when the time is right (assuming that time ever arrives).

Ballsy of Altman to tell lawmakers to their faces that they're on the path to creating something that would potentially eclipse their own power. But like I said, I highly, highly doubt that that will ever be the case.

39

drekmonger t1_j6ezlpo wrote

> US government/military would just sit there and watch a tiny group of private citizens create something that dwarves the power of nuclear weapons.

You think way too highly of the US government. It's a bunch of old dinosaurs with their hands out for the next grift. They don't know. They don't give a shit.

That's why Russia was able, and continues to be able, to run circles around the US government's anti-psi ops efforts. Power means nothing if it's paralyzed by corruption and greed.

Think about the fights going on in Congress right now. None of that stuff means anything to anyone outside the culture warriors and the grifters.

26

GPT-5entient t1_j6jyg0p wrote

I don't disagree with this sentiment, but it is funny to mention Russia on one hand and then US government being corrupt and incompetent. Compared to Russia our government is highly competent in every way and not corrupt at all.

2

drekmonger t1_j6k00gx wrote

Russia's government is a mafia. Corruption is the point. They're good at spreading that corruption.

The US government is divided, not just politically, but between career individuals who generally believe in the institutions they serve and out right crooks, usually politically appointed, nowadays often in Putin's pocket, or in the pocket of someone in Putin's pocket.

3

TeamPupNSudz t1_j6g8uh8 wrote

> Why do I think this? Personally, I believe it's painfully obvious that once private AI organizations come anywhere near something resembling AGI, they'll get taken over/nationalized by their respective national governments/armed forces.

I think unless it's specifically created in-house by the US Government (and classified), it won't really matter. The cat will be out of the bag at that point, and the technology used to create it will be known and public. Likely the only thing giving first movers an advantage from subsequent competitors is cost. Just look how long it took after DALLE2 before we had Midjourney and Stable Diffusion, both of which are arguably better than DALLE2. Sure, we're probably talking about a different scale, but I don't think a few billion dollars would get in the way of Google, Facebook, Microsoft all developing one, let alone the Chinese government.

3

mlhender t1_j6gk5nd wrote

Nah. Google already has a much more powerful “chat gpt” they use internally. So does Facebook. They just haven’t released them yet.

2

GPT-5entient t1_j6jyo6d wrote

Google yes, but Facebook? I know they have LLM but better than GPT 3.5? That's a stretch...

2

bartturner t1_j6hqv5n wrote

Agree. But curious why reality gets a down vote?

1

mlhender t1_j6hwwv0 wrote

People want to believe this isn’t happening.

1

GPT-5entient t1_j6jxt6a wrote

Strongly agree. I think there should be a new Manhattan Project or CERT like undertaking to develop AGI. It also should be international (at least within the Western sphere - NATO and friends). Private companies can and should participate, but the tech will have to be public so that no public company can profit from it by itself.

2