| ▲ | denimnerd42 an hour ago |
| the alignment issue has become huge in recent months. the tool should do what I want it to do and not be aligned against me. |
|
| ▲ | datadrivenangel 13 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| The competing access needs problem here, is what if you want to do things that are un-alligned with the interests of your neighbors, your society, your government's laws, the AI company, etc. Maybe you want to do piracy. Should AI help you do felonies? |
| |
|
| ▲ | ralfd an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| But other users are not aligned to me, other people are the worst and potentially highly dangerous. Im serious, not sarcasm. |
| |
| ▲ | ipsod an hour ago | parent [-] | | Let's say you're facing an average psycho, who is intent on mass murder - the more the better. Would you rather them have: a) guns b) psycho-aligned next-gen AI | | |
| ▲ | Arainach 29 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | False dichotomy, there's no reason not to have controls on both. Given the choice between them having access to guns and nuclear waste my answer is also "neither". | | |
| ▲ | ipsod 22 minutes ago | parent [-] | | The question was meant to illustrate the actual danger of always-user-aligned AI, not to vote for which one we get to keep. So many here get so worried about guns, but don't think twice about how dangerous AI can be. |
| |
| ▲ | afthonos 33 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Obviously (a). | |
| ▲ | thrwaway55 12 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Hegseth already has both A and B. Anthropic already answered this, the answer to this choice is a resounding yes | |
| ▲ | georgemcbay 32 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Would you rather them have: As an American... I suspect that regardless of what I want they will have virtually unlimited access to both now that the tech industry understands how the lobbying game works. |
|
|
