zucker42 (u/zucker42)

zucker42 commented on Safe Superintelligence Inc. ssi.inc... · Posted by u/nick_pou

m3kw9 · 2 years ago

Why do people always think that a superintelligent being will always be destructive/evil to US? I rather have the opposite view where if you are really intelligent, you don’t see things as a zero sum game

zucker42 · 2 years ago

Convergent instrumental goals[1] and the orthogonality thesis[2], among other reasons.

[1] https://youtu.be/ZeecOKBus3Q?si=cYJUaxjIJPIbubRL

[2] https://youtu.be/hEUO6pjwFOo?si=DXVosLh6YTsMkKOx

zucker42 commented on Safe Superintelligence Inc. ssi.inc... · Posted by u/nick_pou

Animats · 2 years ago

What does "safe" mean?

1. Will not produce chat results which are politically incorrect and result in publicity about "toxic" comments?

2. Will not return false factual information which is dangerously wrong, such as that bad recipe on YC yesterday likely to incubate botulism toxin?

3. Will not make decisions which harm individuals but benefit the company running the system?

4. Will not try to take over from humans?

Most of the political attempts focus on type 1. Errors of type 2 are a serious problem. Type 3 errors are considered a feature by some, and are ignored by political regulators. We're not close to type 4 yet.

zucker42 · 2 years ago

Ilya's talking about type 4.

zucker42 commented on AI Search: The Bitter-Er Lesson yellow-apartment-148.noti... · Posted by u/dwighttk

zucker42 · 2 years ago

If I had to bet money on it, researchers at top labs have already tried applying search to existing models. The idea to do so is pretty obvious. I don't think it's the one key insight to achieve AGI as the author claims.

zucker42 commented on Uncensor any LLM with abliteration huggingface.co/blog/mlabo... · Posted by u/mizzao

vasco · 2 years ago

> "As an AI assistant, I cannot help you." While this safety feature is crucial for preventing misuse,

What is the safety added by this? What is unsafe about a computer giving you answers?

zucker42 · 2 years ago

The main thing I'd be worried about in the short term is models making accessible the information to synthesize a pandemic capable virus.

zucker42 commented on Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting businessinsider.com/opena... · Posted by u/blackmanta

cvalka · 2 years ago

They just folded. They were not the right people for the task. They would have prevailed with a bit more persistence and better PR.

zucker42 · 2 years ago

Exactly. If the board had the reasons in this article ready to go when they fired Altman, things may have gone much differently.

zucker42 commented on Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting businessinsider.com/opena... · Posted by u/blackmanta

rPlayer6554 · 2 years ago

As much as on paper they aren't the board's boss, based on how events turned out they effectively were. They had leverage over the board to get what they want.

zucker42 · 2 years ago

I agree that the board overestimated their own power, and underestimated the need to get their business partners on board with Altman's firing. However, I think calling Microsoft the board's boss implies that Microsoft has some sort of moral or legal high ground.

One way this debacle has been portrayed in the media is "an unaccountable board tried to destroy a profitable company". I think a more accurate portrayal is "Sam Altman and Microsoft worked together to deemphasize the company's scientific and humanitarian goals and emphasize building successful and profitable products". It's sort of depressing how Microsoft was able to "capture" a nonprofit.

zucker42 commented on Ex-OpenAI board member reveals what led to Sam Altman's brief ousting businessinsider.com/opena... · Posted by u/blackmanta

tbrownaw · 2 years ago

> She said, "We were very careful, very deliberate about who we told, which was essentially almost no one in advance, other than obviously our legal team and so that's kind of what took us to to November 17."

Did they not at least have a briefing packet or something prepared to give to major investors (ie, Microsoft) day-of if they were so worried about leaks that they couldn't get the major investors (ie, their own bosses) on board ahead of time?

zucker42 · 2 years ago

Major investors aren't the board's boss in this case because OpenAI is a nonprofit. Microsoft is incentivized to act against the goals nonprofit's charter (and in fact they did in this case).

zucker42 commented on Jan Leike joins Anthropic on their superalignment team twitter.com/janleike/stat... · Posted by u/icpmacdo

afefers · 2 years ago

Huh! All this time I thought the "super" was just for branding/differentiation.

zucker42 · 2 years ago

That was definitely part of it.

zucker42 commented on Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu overkill.wtf/nintendo-sue... · Posted by u/brandrick

gertop · 2 years ago

Seriously it's just bizarre how obtuse HN can be when it comes to piracy.

Nobody is dumping their own games. Very few buy the switch games they emulate.

The following usual claim is "it's Nintendo's own fault for not releasing their games on PC and Android". What kind of asinine argument is that?

Then there's the "emulation isn't illegal", which is probably the only sound argument.

But that isn't the issue here. The issue is the authors are now making over 500k/yr from their emulator, whose only purpose is to pirate games that are still commercially available.

zucker42 · 2 years ago

> "it's Nintendo's own fault for not releasing their games on PC and Android"

I understand if you disagree with this argument (I don't know if I'd endorse it wholeheartedly), but I don't see how it is asinine. The wider context here is that there are people who believe in "general computing", i.e. the idea that users should retain full control over computing devices and software they buy.

The philosophy of companies of companies like Nintendo is that when you buy a game from them, you are buying the right to play the game in exactly the way they want. If they could make modding illegal, they would (it is in Japan, to my understanding). This runs counter to the idea of general computing, where you should be to play a game you buy in any way you want, including modding, or playing on a different device, etc.

So to return to the point, the argument is that by refusing to sell their games to users of other platforms (as well as their other actions), Nintendo is working against the goal of general computing, and therefore it's not worth feeling sorry for them when people pirate the game. Phrased differently, people who don't own a Switch have no way to play the game besides pirating, and people should be able to buy games separately from devices.

Another fundamental argument here is that hardware/software walled gardens which are enforced by anti-circumvention and copyright laws are basically anti-competitive monopolies.

zucker42 commented on Nintendo is suing the creators of Switch emulator Yuzu overkill.wtf/nintendo-sue... · Posted by u/brandrick

joemi · 2 years ago

Why is that BS? It's true. It's not the only use of an emulator, but it's the primary use.

zucker42 · 2 years ago

A more accurate rewording of Nintendo's statement (keeping their point of view):

> A video emulator is piece of software that allows a user to run a video game on a platform different from that for which is was written. Many people use emulators to play unlawfully obtained pirated games.

Wording something as definition implies that the statement both contains no falsehoods and is complete.

Saying that the purpose of an emulator is to play pirated games is not true. I use an emulator to play Super Smash Bros Melee on my computer, with the ROM obtained from the disk I own. People have modded the Super Smash Bros Melee game to allow for online play, something that would be impossible without an emulator. People used emulators to find a bug in Ocarina of Time that would allow them to beat the game (played on original hardware) faster.

But the statement is written to confuse a non-technical fact finder into thinking that the only purpose of an emulator is to play a video game without paying for it, or to help others to do so. And it's done so because that Nintendo doesn't believe that you own the game you buy from it.