Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
In you're in favor of "AI safety" (broad definition), what's your most compelling cast-length argument?
33 replies
11 recasts
61 reactions
Ben 🟪
@benersing
At fist automanufacturers made similar arguments against requiring seatbelts in cars. Imagine what we’d be saying about our great/grandparents if that line of thinking had prevailed.
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
It took 60 years from Model T to first seat belt laws? So the technology was well understood.
2 replies
1 recast
1 reaction
Ben 🟪
@benersing
Yes, that's true: it took 60 years of people dying before the political will could be mustered. The issue was known as early as the 1900s; not too dissimilar a situation from today's AI discussions. AI is not a new technology, its potential is well understood. Regulation isn't going to kill it at this point.
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
> AI is not a new technology, its potential is well understood. Regulation isn't going to kill it at this point. I disagree with all 3 of those statements? :) Every day there's new stuff and we still don't understand it. Hard to regulate something you don't understand effectively.
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
GIGAMΞSH
@gigamesh
Do you even disagree with a law that requires models make a reasonable effort to not mislead people into believing the model is a person? That seems like the equivalent of a seat belt to me. Very small constraint with enormous human life-respecting value.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Ben 🟪
@benersing
Totally fair :) GPTs are new but AI as a field of research goes back to the 1950s. Where we are today has been a long anticipated by scientists. Hard, yes, but important given that our unknowns are the result of the creation itself. Not an outside factor. I don't believe this has ever before been the case.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
