this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2024
2 points (100.0% liked)

SneerClub

963 readers
16 users here now

Hurling ordure at the TREACLES, especially those closely related to LessWrong.

AI-Industrial-Complex grift is fine as long as it sufficiently relates to the AI doom from the TREACLES. (Though TechTakes may be more suitable.)

This is sneer club, not debate club. Unless it's amusing debate.

[Especially don't debate the race scientists, if any sneak in - we ban and delete them as unsuitable for the server.]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Shitgenstein1@awful.systems 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

A year and two and a half months since his Time magazine doomer article.

No shut downs of large AI training - in fact only expanded. No ceiling on compute power. No multinational agreements to regulate GPU clusters or first strike rogue datacenters.

Just another note in a panic that accomplished nothing.

[–] Soyweiser@awful.systems 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

No shut downs of large AI training

At least the lack of Rationalist suicide bombers running at data centers and shouting 'Dust specks!' is encouraging.

[–] sc_griffith@awful.systems 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

why would rationalists do something difficult and scary in real life, when they could be wanking each other off with crank fanfiction and buying ~~castles~~ manor houses for the benefit of the future

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

considering that the more extemist faction is probably homeschooled, i don't expect that any of them has ochem skills good enough to not die in mysterious fire when cooking device like this

[–] skillissuer@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago

so many stupid ways to die, you wouldn't believe

[–] fartsparkles@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It’s also a bunch of brainfarting drivel that could be summarized:

Before we accidentally make an AI capable of posing existential risk to human being safety, perhaps we should find out how to build effective safety measures first.

Or

Read Asimov’s I, Robot. Then note that in our reality, we’ve not yet invented the Three Laws of Robotics.

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Before we accidentally make an AI capable of posing existential risk to human being safety, perhaps we should find out how to build effective safety measures first.

You make his position sound way more measured and responsible than it is.

His 'effective safety measures' are something like A) solve ethics B) hardcode the result into every AI, I.e. garbage philosophy meets garbage sci-fi.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This guy is going to be very upset when he realizes that there is no absolute morality.

[–] AcausalRobotGod@awful.systems 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

A good chunk of philosophers do believe there are moral facts, but this is less useful for these purposes than one would think

[–] froztbyte@awful.systems 1 points 2 months ago

yeah it’s been absolutely hilarious to watch this play out in LLM space. so many prompt configurations and model deployments with so very many string-based rule inputs, meant to be configuring inviolable behaviour, that still get egregiously broken

and afaict none of the dipshits have really seemed to internalise that just maybe their approach isn’t working