Note that Jeff and crew have cleverly structured their company to avoid problematic uses of AI (e.g., weapons or tracking humans). I suspect that many top researchers will want to work there for this reason, and to work with other top researchers who have a history of delivering results.

▲

2001zhaozhao 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Note that Jeff and crew have cleverly structured their company to avoid problematic uses of AI

Do you have more sources/info on this?

	▲	tmoertel 4 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		They do not call attention to this aspect of their new company, but it is implicit in their business model: https://xcancel.com/JeffDean/status/2085034604172603724 In short, they are in the business of using AI to automate the discovery of useful knowledge, not to sell general-purpose AI capabilities that could be directly used in troubling ways.
	▲	moralestapia an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		x2 All the "bad guys" of today were the "good guys" at some point in time. You even cheered for them back then.

▲

wavemode an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Like how OpenAI is (was?) structured as a nonprofit?

▲

paganel 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

There's this somewhere on that page:

> securing cyberspace,

which has clear military implications, at least in today's age.

▲

jedberg an hour ago | parent | next [-]

So does more efficient cooking methods, but that is not the primary focus.

As opposed to say weapons systems or targeting systems, which are really only for military use.

The military needs a lot of things that other people need, and some things that only the military needs. If you don't work on the things only the military needs, I think you're in the clear.

▲

tmoertel 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Do you believe that securing cyberspace is problematic solely because it has military implications? I mean, everything has military implications. That fact doesn't imply, however, that those things are bad for society.

	▲	paganel 17 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> I mean, everything has military implications In essence I agree with that, it's just that cyber-security has particularly been the focus of recent military discourse. Just yesterday I was reading an article here in the Romanian mainstream media about how Constanta Port's (our biggest port at the Black Sea) IT infrastructure has been under constant cyber attacks (presumably by the Russians) so as to hinder the export of Ukrainian grains through it. And this is just one of the many such (relatively) recent examples.

▲

bredren 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Securing cyberspace matters to everyone. Defending critical infrastructure or design of tactical cyber-offense is reasonably in scope for military work.

However, reducing (or rather limiting the increase of) PII leakage and impact of ransomware activities is much closer to day-to-day mainstreet of most people.

Anyone committed to advancing science should care about this regardless of its potential contributions to defense.