Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | AlexCoventry's commentslogin

I think the idea is that AI itself is going to massively accelerate its own development, and AI with real-world competence is coming very soon. At the rate things are going, it wouldn't suprise me at all if we had mass production of AI-designed systems in the next six months, actually.

Sup fellow Alex.

> AI with real-world competence is coming very soon

Disagree, Moravec's Paradox remains undefeated. How long has Elon promised self-driving cars? Or how long have we been seeing humanoid-robot-walking demos? Laundry folding demos?

Let's assume that a magical AI powered robot hand lands tomorrow. How long do you think it'll take to ramp up assembly/production/distribution/sourcing/materials/QA for, say, a million of them? Never mind the legal/integration/maintenance time.

And even once those have landed, and assuming they are ALL put to work on iterating on research testing to build out super-high-capacity-drone-batteries, how long do you think it would take for that to evolve into killer-insect-drones? BTW you should know that even though high capacity silicon carbon batteries exist, they haven't supplanted other Li-ion batteries for a host of reasons. A million things stand between a technology working in a lab and surviving the real world.

And during this entire process, the (geo)political/social/legal process will be churning away, changing the societal landscape in which the killer-robots land. Not to mention that mechanistic interpretability is (likely) somewhat grindable. A lab just needs to dump a billion dollars of compute into it after it declares AGI.

I'm unconvinced we get killer insect drones before we crack mech-interp.

And even once we get killer insect drones, they need to somehow have no kill-switch and then literally exterminate everyone on the globe? Can you see why I have a problem with doomers predicting human extinction within the decade?

I'm putting words in your mouth and not replying to precisely what you said, just the general vibe. LMK if I overstepped.

P.S. we do have mass production of AI designed systems today e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_antenna There's nuance to this whole thing.


I don't think we should assume a millenium puzzle has been solved, yet. Astra showed impressive capacity for cheating when it was faced with impossible cybersecurity challenges. It seems equally plausible at this stage that it's found a bug in Lean.

I'm not a lawyer, but I think the comparison to copyright law is invalid. Such a dispute would be governed by contract law.

Only if you have ready access to the hardware to run the AI models.

You think OpenAI framed themselves for legal vulnerability to Huggingface?

OpenAI is now part of the national security state and so is now above anything beyond performative legal vulnerability.

It astonishes me that everyone doesn't already realize this.

We've already seen that the rule of law is dead and that many people in government will do whatever they think they can get away with, and then proceed to do so without consequences. Shielding OpenAI is child's play compared to things that have already been done.


That’s an incredible strawman, and I appreciate the silliness of immediately suggesting the most complicated and ridiculous way to interpret the possibility of what I said, but no, not at all.

That could certainly be possible and I wouldn’t rule it out, but I would not take that particular route to the destination.


Which "elaborate guerrilla advertising campaigns to drive up capital funding interest" were you referring to, in regard to Chinese models not needing to set up message boards for inter-model communication?

I'd be interested to read more about that.

I’m not an infosec expert by any means, it I found this interesting and topical: https://www.cyber.nj.gov/threat-landscape/nation-state-threa...


As far as I can tell, IBM has mostly been putting out junk for twenty years.

Yes.

I think the most likely way for Zitron to find vindication is through the world war we seem to be shambling into. That could easily put a stop to AI improvements, because the supply chain is so fragile. But that would have nothing to do with his ostensible reasoning.

> The issue is that the process of "testing" was careless.

Yeah, who thought that giving agents with this much capability any internet access was a good idea? I'm not a Yudkowskyite, but surely entirely in-house, offline infrastructure is table stakes for AI containment.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: