Is it just me, or has the BS with OpenAI shown that nobody in the AI space actually cares about "safeguarding AGI?"

Money wins, every time. They’re not concerned with accidentally destroying humanity with an out-of-control and dangerous AI who has decided “humans are the problem.” (I mean, that’s a little sci-fi anyway, an AGI couldn’t “infect” the entire internet as it currently exists.)

However, it’s very clear that the OpenAI board was correct about Sam Altman, with how quickly him and many employees bailed to join Microsoft directly. If he was so concerned with safeguarding AGI, why not spin up a new non-profit.

Oh, right, because that was just Public Relations horseshit to get his company a head-start in the AI space while fear-mongering about what is an unlikely doomsday scenario.


So, let’s review:

  1. The fear-mongering about AGI was always just that. How could an intelligence that requires massive amounts of CPU, RAM, and database storage even concievably able to leave the confines of its own computing environment? It’s not like it can “hop” onto a consumer computer with a fraction of the same CPU power and somehow still be able to compute at the same level. AI doesn’t have a “body” and even if it did, it could only affect the world as much as a single body could. All these fears about rogue AGI are total misunderstandings of how computing works.
  2. Sam Altman went for fear mongering to temper expectations and to make others fear pursuing AGI themselves. He always knew his end-goal was profit, but like all good modern CEOs, they have to position themselves as somehow caring about humanity when it is clear they could give a living flying fuck about anyone but themselves and how much money they make.
  3. Sam Altman talks shit about Elon Musk and how he “wants to save the world, but only if he’s the one who can save it.” I mean, he’s not wrong, but he’s also projecting a lot here. He’s exactly the fucking same, he claimed only he and his non-profit could “safeguard” AGI and here he’s going to work for a private company because hot damn he never actually gave a shit about safeguarding AGI to begin with. He’s a fucking shit slinging hypocrite of the highest order.
  4. Last, but certainly not least. Annie Altman, Sam Altman’s younger, lesser-known sister, has held for a long time that she was sexually abused by her brother. All of these rich people are all Jeffrey Epstein levels of fucked up, which is probably part of why the Epstein investigation got shoved under the rug. You’d think a company like Microsoft would already know this or vet this. They do know, they don’t care, and they’ll only give a shit if the news ends up making a stink about it. That’s how corporations work.

So do other Lemmings agree, or have other thoughts on this?


And one final point for the right-wing cranks: Not being able to make an LLM say fucked up racist things isn’t the kind of safeguarding they were ever talking about with AGI, so please stop conflating “safeguarding AGI” with “preventing abusive racist assholes from abusing our service.” They aren’t safeguarding AGI when they prevent you from making GPT-4 spit out racial slurs or other horrible nonsense. They’re safeguarding their service from loser ass chucklefucks like you.

blackernel,

I agree with everything you said I only want to add that there is kinda one or two ways for the AGI problem a la Sci-Fi to happen.

By far the most straight forward way is if the military believe that it can be used as a fail safe in MAD scenarios, i.e. if they give the AI the power to launch nuclear ICBM’s a la War Games. Not very likely, but still not something we want to dismiss entirely. This is also a problem with regular AI and LLM’s.

The second, and, in my opinion, more likely scenario is if the AI is able to get a large number of people to trust it implicitly and then use seemingly unrelated benign actions from each of them to do something catastrophic.

Something you may notice about these two scenarios is that neither one of them can be “safeguarded” in the code, only by educating people on the proper usage of and posture to have when handling AI.

SnotFlickerman, (edited )

Exactly! As someone else astutely pointed out, the real danger is wreckless humans and what they decide to put an AGI in charge of. The War Games idea of putting it in charge of the nuclear arsenal is exactly the kind of short-sighted, dim-witted, utterly human hubris of a decision that would make it possible.

Not everything is connected to the internet, the nuclear arsenal certainly is air-gapped, but a human making the choice to put it in charge isn’t something you can “safeguard.” We’re on the exact same page.

A rogue AGI absolutely is capable of causing damage but only in very specific and unlikely scenarios is it capable of human-world-ending catastrophe.

Deceptichum,
@Deceptichum@kbin.social avatar

We are no where near developing AGI.

It’s so far fetched that you might as well legislate for time travel and FTL drives while you’re at it.

Arin,

I agree we're far out, but not as far as you think. Advancements are insane and AGI could be here in 5-10 years. The way the industry have been attempting it the past decade is wrong though, training should be more indepth than images/videos, I think a few are starting to understand how to do more indepth training, so even more progress will start soon

agent_flounder,
@agent_flounder@lemmy.world avatar

I think 5-10 years is optimistic given how much hand tuning / manual training has to take place. Given how insanely long it’s taken to get where we are and how many times I’ve heard machine intelligence oversold, and based on what LLMs can do I think we are still many decades out.

That said, what ML and AI can do is still game changing and will still have an impact even if it isn’t some kind of scary skynet AGI thing.

jacksilver,

We’ve been promised self driving cars for over 10 years and still aren’t close, I think we’re a long ways away from AGI.

2xsaiko,
@2xsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

I would even argue the only way to get self-driving cars that actually work well is with AGI. I don’t think we’re going to get either in a very long time.

echodot,

Self driving cars as an area in which straight AI would probably work very well. I don’t think we need a full-on intelligence to drive around.

Anyway we already do have self-driving cars they’re just not very mainstream yet. Mostly because they’re prohibitively expensive and no one trusts them exactly but that’s more because there’s other idiot humans around than anything else.

intensely_human,

Yeah if we were at the point with AGI that we’re at with self driving cars, then AGI would be fully implemented, just still with some safety issues and only in the hands of a few corporations.

That’s hardly “sci fi”. That’s currently existing behind closed doors.

SnotFlickerman,

To be fair, that promise came from someone who is clearly a conman of a swindler. If you ever took that promise seriously… I’m sorry.

NOT_RICK,
@NOT_RICK@lemmy.world avatar

Elon/Tesla is far from the only outfit working on self driving. Chevy Cruise is the one that recently dragged a person under the car for dozens of feet.

SnotFlickerman,

For sure, but the traditional motor vehicle companies that were dragged kicking and screaming into the EV game were not making the same predictions of how quickly we would get to self-driving. That was pretty much all Elon Musk setting the absurd timelines, and a handful of tech companies who also were pursuing driverless tech. I would say the “serious” car companies never promised that, but maybe I’m wrong and just never saw it.

jacksilver,

No I absolutely agree with you, I’ve been skeptical of all the self driving news for years. However, I was using it as a parallel to other AI based discussions. While Elon may have been over hyping what was going to be possible in the near future, there is no evidence that other people aren’t doing the same now.

Just like with autonomous vehicles, we’ve made impressive leaps in what ML can do, but I think there is still a long road ahead.

SnotFlickerman,

Entirely agreed, we have such a long path ahead.

brambledog,

I think you are being optimistic.

If you are old enough to remember AIM chatbots, this current generation is maybe multiple times more advanced, not exponentially so. From what I have seen, all the incredible advancements have been in image production.

This leads me to believe that AGI has never been the true commercial goal, but rather an advancement of propaganda media and its creation.

WldFyre,

This leads me to believe that AGI has never been the true commercial goal, but rather an advancement of propaganda media and its creation.

Uh what? Why wouldn’t it be because text/image generation isn’t even on the same plane of difficulty as AGI?

rip_art_bell,
@rip_art_bell@lemmy.world avatar

How do you know?

Deceptichum,
@Deceptichum@kbin.social avatar

Because I understand what LLMs and current AI theory/framework enables.

Nothing we have or could conceive has the potential to become an AGI.

echodot,

Because I’m smarter than you isn’t really an answer

intensely_human,

Are you able to articulate at least one specific reason that we are nowhere close to developing AGI?

Without any specific reason being stated, I’m tempted to believe you are just confidently declaring this to protect yourself from fear.

PlexSheep,
@PlexSheep@feddit.de avatar

Imagine if we had FTL, that would be so cool.

echodot,

If we actually had AGI I suppose it’s possible we would have FTL.

Kidplayer_666,

If they wanted to safeguard AI, they would actually make the models public. Bad actors are bound to get them anyways, hiding it behind secrecy is very unlikely. And I mean, AI could make a virus infecting most infrastructure on planet (Amazon and Google data centres) and then shutting it down or using it for its own purposes. As several programming memes lay out, the entire modern web infrastructure is surprisingly dependent on just a few APIs and tools

SnotFlickerman, (edited )

AI could make a virus infecting most infrastructure on planet (Amazon and Google data centres)

Most important infrastructure on the planet is air-gapped, meaning it’s not connected to the internet, for good reason. Reasons like this. The thing is, as it stands, a determined human could do this as well with Google and Amazon. Sorry, having a chuckle over here that you’re conflating two cloud hosts with “all the infrustructure on the planet” like irrigation canals out in the boonies are somehow internet connected.

the entire modern web infrastructure is surprisingly dependent on just a few APIs and tools

That doesn’t mean that you can deploy a payload in a reasonable amount of time to every device on the planet. Dude, half the people in third world countries aren’t even connected, and if they are, they’re dealing with like 2G speeds on a cellphone service and they definitely don’t own a computer, they only have a phone. There’s all kinds of speed limitations to the hardware in reality. Just because you might have a fast connection and fast PC doesn’t mean everyone does, and those physical limitations make an rogue AGI “destroying infrastructure” a big of a laugh.

lurch,

You’re right, but there are other dangers, i.e.:

  1. Using it for high-frequency trading and it behaves brutally wrong and ruins an important company/bank using it or crashes the market in a very problematic way.
  2. Using it to control heavy machinery or weapons.

The danger is recklessness of humans at the moment. When they give that reaper drone an AI pilot, so it can react before the humans on the controls even know it’s in trouble, that’s when shit is about to go sideways. It won’t cause the end of the world, but death, destruction and maybe even another war.

SnotFlickerman,

These are the realistic scenarios where it’s dangerous. I guess my issue is that the media always plays it up as world-ending. The reality is it can be damaging, absolutely, but nothing that will completely break down the world.

You’re exactly right that the danger is in the wreckless humans. It’s what we teach the AGI and what we put in charge of it that is in danger. Hell, it’s already a danger in humans. The biggest obstacle to teaching humans things is the stuff you didn’t intend to teach them but they learned by accident from what you taught them. Just because you teach someone morals doesn’t mean they will follow them, some people will just learn that you have to play like you give a shit about morals and will learn to have a moral face, attitude, and personality while being a fucking swindler underneath. The same will go for AGIs, and the idea that we can be sure of what we are teaching them is absurd.

Wes_Dev,

I’m of the opinion that Microsoft was tired of losing money on OpenAI, so made some kind of plan to out the current CEO, tank the stock price, and be in the perfect position to buy the company and monopolize AI technology. It wouldn’t be the first time they pulled shady crap like that.

SnotFlickerman,

Embrace Extend Extuinguish

set_secret,

SAM’S LLM agrees with you.

-gpt4

Alright, let’s dive into this cesspool of corporate and AGI ethics:

  1. The whole rogue AGI apocalypse scenario is more Hollywood than Silicon Valley. AGIs like Skynet are great for popcorn flicks but in reality, they’re about as likely as a kangaroo becoming Prime Minister. The computing power needed for an AGI to go rogue is not something you can find in your average laptop.
  2. Sam Altman playing the AGI safety card could easily be seen as a crafty move to keep competitors at bay and wrap his profit-driven motives in a pretty ‘saving humanity’ bow. After all, in the corporate world, wearing a cape of altruism makes dodging taxes and scrutiny a bit easier.
  3. Altman’s criticisms of Elon Musk could be seen as the pot calling the kettle black. Both seem to be cut from the same cloth – big talk about saving the world, but at the end of the day, it’s all about who gets to be the hero in the billionaire’s club.
  4. The allegations against Sam Altman are part of a wider narrative that often surfaces around powerful figures. It’s like a classic play: as soon as someone climbs the ladder, out come the skeletons from the closet. Whether true or not, these stories get less attention than a new iPhone release, because, hey, who wants to take down a tech titan when there’s money to be made?

And on your last point, yep, moderating content to avoid racist rants isn’t exactly what they meant by “safeguarding AGI.” It’s more like putting a Band-Aid on a bullet wound – it looks like they’re doing something, but in reality, it’s just a cosmetic fix to keep the masses and the ad revenue rolling in.

SnotFlickerman,

That’s funny. It’s definitely not a terrible LLM.

MudMan,
@MudMan@kbin.social avatar

"Safeguarding AGI" is as much of a concern as making sure the terrorists don't get warp drives.

But then, armies of killer teenagers radicalized by playing Mortal Kombat was never going to be a thing, either, and we spent decades arguing with politicians about that one. Once the PR nightmare is out it's really hard to put back in the box. Lamp. Bag. Whatever metaphor I'm going for here.

SnotFlickerman,

But then, armies of killer teenagers radicalized by playing Mortal Kombat was never going to be a thing, either,

I remember this being a big plot point in one of the worst movies starring Robin Williams ever made, Toys.

They had all these kids playing mindless video games where you got bonus points for war crimes.

It was meant to be a comedy movie, but it’s more hilarious for how fucking bad it is.

Uranium3006,
@Uranium3006@kbin.social avatar

trusting corporations is always a bad idea

BolexForSoup,
@BolexForSoup@kbin.social avatar

All I know is Satya is making out like a bandit no matter what lmfao

Rottcodd,
@Rottcodd@kbin.social avatar

Money wins, every time.

And right there, you answered your own (presumably rhetorical) question.

The money people jumped on AI as soon as they scented the chance of profit, and that's it. ALL other considerations are now secondary to a handful of psychopaths making as much money as possible.

LadyLikesSpiders,

“A handful of psychopaths making as much money as possible”

Capitalism in a nut shell

Omega_Haxors,

Unrelated but is your name a reference to Amy Likes Spiders? That was my favorite poem in DDLC.

LadyLikesSpiders,

Probably subconsciously. I came up with the name long after playing the game, but I wasn’t thinking of it when I made it. I actually am just a lady who likes spiders

Omega_Haxors,

I love spiders, and lots of bugs really. I have zero respect for people who look down on them when they’re just so damn cute.

Like how can anyone look at this and say anything other than “awww” jumping spider

LadyLikesSpiders,

awww

Yeah you’re right. Look at that little cutie <3

I use the way people treat other animals, especially ones like bugs and stuff, the ones we barely give a second thought about, as a measure of character. Phobias are one thing, but at least have compassion for this other living thing

Omega_Haxors,

Very few will get a chance to feel what it’s like to pet a bug and have it go from fearing for its life to trusting you with its life. They genuinely have no framework for a world that treats them as disposable when you show them compassion, and it’s magical how they react.

darth_helmet,

This was always coming, and we’re going to do fuck all about it. But on the upside, the future is going to be absolutely rad for the .001%

Scew,
@Scew@lemmy.world avatar

In other news, grass still green

CarlosCheddar,

I’ve only seen a bunch of rumors about the firing but nothing concrete since the board hasn’t given an explanation. So yeah it could be that money wins or it could be something else entirely.

I doubt that Microsoft would’ve hired him if he had strong allegations of wrongdoing.

SnotFlickerman,

You’re talking about a company that used to be run by Bill Gates, whose wife divorced him over his creepy connections with Epstein and his coming-on to women who worked for him while he was married and running Microsoft.

This was their CEO for a long-ass time and had big influence on the company after leaving.

But sure, Microsoft “cares” about such a thing. Companies only care about bad Public Relations. They literally will ignore it until the news media picks it up, and then, and only then they will “investigate.” As long as big media ignores it, they can safely ignore it.

Tolstoshev,

The naive irony of all the Less Wrong people discussing letting the AI out of the box when we all know there won’t be a box at all.

theneverfox,
@theneverfox@pawb.social avatar

It’s already out… People have been letting it out for months to do all sorts of things

Luckily it turns out empathy and lewdness are practically built in to these models

half_built_pyramids,

itt, lots of people who don’t know shit about the glorified decision trees people call ai

Bishma,
@Bishma@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

40+ years on this planet have made me 100% certain that no one with the power to safeguard AGI will make any legitimate effort to do so. Just like we have companies spending millions greenwashing while they pollute more than ever, we’ll have plenty of lip-service about it but never anything useful.

Immersive_Matthew,

Anyone who thinks America or your local government is going to regulate AI are delusional, especially in the face of companies planning to build AI Data Centers on ships and float them into International waters where the law does not apply to them. If not there,they will put it in space. Unregulated AI is coming where you like it or not, unless we destroy the entire planet which I would not rule out. Sure this commenter would agree on that.

aniki,

deleted_by_author

  • Loading...
  • Immersive_Matthew,

    Who is?

    brambledog,

    An AI data center acting as a rogue state will just be sunk the moment they actually become a legitimate problem.

    Immersive_Matthew,

    And billionaires will pay their fair share of taxes.

    theneverfox,
    @theneverfox@pawb.social avatar

    Depends on how much money and power they’re entangled with, and who they threaten

    Eranziel,

    I don’t disagree that the people with money who are funding this kind of development don’t care about regulations or safety.

    That said, the idea that they’ll do it out on the open sea or in space are absolutely laughable. Those ideas pitched so far completely ignore all the obvious engineering problems. Not to mention that going to international waters to avoid regulations means that the navy of that country you’re thumbing your nose at now has free reign on you.

    sgtnasty,
    @sgtnasty@lemmy.ml avatar

    All this noise just to serve up ads

    time_fo_that,

    My biggest concern with generative AI is all of the CEOs that will eagerly seize the opportunity (and some already have) to fire staff and offload their work onto their remaining employees so they can use ChatGPT to make up for lost productivity. Easy way for them to further line their pockets without increasing pay for anyone else, further dividing the worker/CEO wage disparity and class divide.

    knotthatone,

    My biggest issue with this whole debacle is that the non-profit board hasn’t clearly explained itself to the pubic or its employees. There’s an ethics discussion that absolutely positively needs to happen and there needs to be some sort of governance in place around a myriad legal and moral issues from copyright to displacing human jobs and that can’t happen right now because we still don’t know what the fuck the board was trying to accomplish.

    I’m all for responsible stewards of AI, but I don’t think this board is it. They’ve cut themselves out of any future governance ability in any event.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • [email protected]
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • oklahoma
  • Socialism
  • KbinCafe
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • SuperSentai
  • feritale
  • KamenRider
  • All magazines