🤔 we're just speculating here my guy

What we're debating, considering on one hand market forces and the other, dangerous results (that come with them PR nightmare, severe public/political blowback) is how much of GPT4's capabilities today is the general public privy to? You're saying 100 percent?

GPT3 has been longer out and Jasper alone has a unicorn valuation.

I use several GPT products at work. Right now we're just in a state of creation The bad products will start dropping off and more mainstream options will emerge from the chaos.

Why is a call for fair and considered discussion getting downvoted? Fuckin reddit sometimes man.

I believe the gamers among us call that The Science Victory? From Civilization?

F f f f fuckin dark!

I love it!

I'm game. Though . I feel like that might make me get winded fast. 😅

Surprisingly less effective, in my experience.

But now I want to run an experiment...

I would say they don't need investor exposure right now. Any AGI conversations they wanted to have with top level investors could easily be reserved to private pitch decks, etc. This is just reactionary PR of an immature company, most likely.

Good way to make it both multimodal and interested in keeping humans around 💀

The thing is, given what we know, there are no indications yet that it would see us as benign. If anything, it would see us as a credible threat to its autonomy and want to rid itself of us. That's the more likely scenario, if we don't get alignment right the first time.

That would make a bad novel.

The very point is that it's spectacularly easy to kill us all without any drama or theatrics.

This is a SPECTACULARLY terrible take. Maybe not #3 but the rest is so bad. 😂

OP: you're talking about AI alignment and yes, currently there's no way to prevent AI from killing us all if we were to develop AGI. The AI community talks a lot about this at lesswrong.com. I recommend going there instead of listening to idiots here.

Here's a fun one

Favorite part:

>"The concrete example I usually use here is nanotech, because there's been pretty detailed analysis of what definitely look like physically attainable lower bounds on what should be possible with nanotech, and those lower bounds are sufficient to carry the point. My lower-bound model of "how a sufficiently powerful intelligence would kill everyone, if it didn't want to not do that" is that it gets access to the Internet, emails some DNA sequences to any of the many many online firms that will take a DNA sequence in the email and ship you back proteins, and bribes/persuades some human who has no idea they're dealing with an AGI to mix proteins in a beaker, which then form a first-stage nanofactory which can build the actual nanomachinery. (Back when I was first deploying this visualization, the wise-sounding critics said "Ah, but how do you know even a superintelligence could solve the protein folding problem, if it didn't already have planet-sized supercomputers?" but one hears less of this after the advent of AlphaFold 2, for some odd reason.) The nanomachinery builds diamondoid bacteria, that replicate with solar power and atmospheric CHON, maybe aggregate into some miniature rockets or jets so they can ride the jetstream to spread across the Earth's atmosphere, get into human bloodstreams and hide, strike on a timer. Losing a conflict with a high-powered cognitive system looks at least as deadly as "everybody on the face of the Earth suddenly falls over dead within the same second".

There will be opponents to everything. We could achieve personal and societal utopia and there will be folks trying to ruin/undermine it because it doesn't align with their religion or general worldview.

The idea that more jobs are coming out of this is beyond absurd.

Exactly. I have been trying to get people to understand it as a "majorly suppressive force" or "downward economic pressure." Especially for artists and writers, who often barely had jobs that could pay a living wage before all of this.

Ahhhh ok. I'm relatively new. Only about a year into lurking there 😁

Not sure what you're referencing! All the content I've read is free. 🤔

He could and should have used a deepfake of his own voice, lipsynced and then stopped moving his mouth while it played. 🙃

I think yes, you can forget about a reliable source of income. The downward economic force this thing will have on the writing and visual art communities will make jobs scarce and pay shit. But there will still be ways to reapply these skills indirectly. Physical artists might have the last bastion of hope given how much robotics are lagging compared to the language models. Ultimately though, no job is safe.

If you're interested in the alignment debate, it gets far, far more nuanced than this... And perfect human cooperation is a pipedream. There will still always be somebody who has very little to lose and a lot to win who is willing to take the gamble.

Lesswrong.com has a lot on this, including the odd/ interesting notion that the first to get AGI should find ways to prevent others from attaining AGI.

Your boss doesn't know? Or doesn't care?