| ▲ | There Is No AI (It's Just People) with Jaron Lanier(singjupost.com) |
| 41 points by andsoitis 2 hours ago | 44 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | bottlepalm an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| This argument is like saying people don't kill people, their parents do. As people wouldn't be who they are without their parents.. This isn't the guns don't kill people, people kill people debate - guns aren't autonomous. AI is. |
| |
| ▲ | InfiniteWarlock an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | AI is not in the least autonomous. When was the last time you downloaded a model and it suddenly decided to book you a hotel room? AI doesn't do anything until you ask it to. No, actually, AI is not even a program, it's just a set of technologies and algorithms. It's like saying bubble sort is autonomous... A harness running inference on a LLM is simply a program that must be invoked with some parameters and thus ultimately a tool, no matter how powerful. The blame is always on who's using the tool. We should not seek to flee from our responsibility. | | |
| ▲ | throwawayk7h 41 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | On occasion, albeit increasingly rarely, I find LLMs do something really unexpected that I certainly did not ask it to and would be way outside the scope of what any reasonable human would infer from my request. Is it my fault for running the LLM? Probably yes. But I think it's misleading to say "AI doesn't do anything until you ask it to". | | |
| ▲ | moritonal 20 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | That "probably" is the problem. If I do something I don't understand, and am not qualified to control, then I'm still at fault. If I start a fire, and loose control of it, it's definitely my fault. If I created a computer virus, ajd it worms half the Internet, it's definitely my fault. | |
| ▲ | adaml_623 33 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | The hallucinations from an LLM are still the result of the prompt even if they are totally senseless |
| |
| ▲ | whack 37 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > When was the last time you downloaded a model and it suddenly decided to book you a hotel room? AI doesn't do anything until you ask it to... The blame is always on who's using the tool. We should not seek to flee from our responsibility. When was the last time you hired an Uber driver and they suddenly decided to drive you to a hotel? Uber drivers don't do anything until you ask them to. Therefore, they aren't autonomous. If your Uber driver decides to drive through a red light and kill someone in the process, the blame is on you for hiring them. You should not seek to flee from your responsibility | | |
| ▲ | adaml_623 34 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Actually Uber drivers will do things even if you don't ask them. Your attempt at logic is very wrong. |
| |
| ▲ | interstice an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I agree with the sentiment but I can absolutely see a long chain of thought about something innocuous ending with a decision to book you a hotel room.. I guess --dangerously-skip-permissions is a bit like ignoring the keep your hands on the steering wheel alert but for life. | |
| ▲ | daishi55 31 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I mean in that sense nothing is autonomous right? As a human I need to be taught, fed, socialized, given instructions, etc… Idk man when codex is working 13 hours straight based on a few line prompt, it feels autonomous to me. | | |
| ▲ | larodi 4 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | well the OS kernel does quite a lot and stays autonomous for even more hours and seems super smart to me - I don't even know what tis doing most of the time, but it does it very well. autonomy and predictability are different things then. the fact something is unpredictable does not make it more autonomous than something that we can trace the logic for. | |
| ▲ | reverius42 13 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's certainly doing a lot of things in that 13 hours that weren't specified in the original prompt! |
| |
| ▲ | axus 31 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | AI is autonomous in the same way a gas leak is autonomous | |
| ▲ | bio_hacker 30 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Tell him to be himself and to find meaning in life. Use that in an uncensored model. | |
| ▲ | SpicyLemonZest 36 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I routinely use AI programs at work that allocate hundreds of dollars worth of cloud resources, even though the only thing I asked them to do is investigate a bug or write a PR. I intentionally don't run powerful AI programs on machines that have my credit card information, or ask them to solve problems in my personal life, but there's a number of programs that would book me hotel rooms and flights in response to "Can you set up a vacation for me..." | |
| ▲ | dyauspitr an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Not true at all. Yes, the initial ask is initiated by a human (for now), but what it does to get to that goal is pretty self driven. It can do a lot of nefarious stuff in the process of completing a request a human has made. |
| |
| ▲ | larodi 8 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think the argument rather is that there is not such thing as AI that is not human-alike. The traits that AI exposes, if I get the point made here correctly, are traits that existed in the training material, even though not evident for the human eye. It is a mirror-like reflection of humanity's traits found in the source material, an Egregore* of a sort. The intelligence emerging, or whatever is emerging, more or less follows human traits, the CoT exposed is very human-like etc. Even though we should not anthropomorphize AI as being sentient or conscious or having a soul, etc., we have to remember that the source material is still not alien writing, or concepts that came from Sirius or emerged from a wormhole. The concern is really nobody reads (or have ever read) 77 TBs of information in order to summarize the most evident traits in it, and there is a fair chance, that where humanity stands today, there are so many bad/damaging traits recorded in this corpus. Then there is a chance the most important features are on a level (or have dimensionality) that is incomprehensible, that humans are unable to reason about (or only few can), because such amount of information is very hard to reason about, or because we don't usually facilitate fractal dimensions when we reason about text and everyday concepts,... or something even more bizarre. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egregore
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal_dimension | |
| ▲ | throw83940484 24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Better approach is "dogs kill people". If your dog kills your baby, you should not get away with some bs excuse like "it never did it before". You are still responsible, and you should get a life in prison! | | |
| ▲ | reverius42 11 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I'm sorry but no, you should not get life in prison if your dog kills your baby without warning. In that horrible scenario, it's punishment enough that you've lost your baby and that your dog did it (and consequently you've also lost your dog). Not every tragedy is a human's fault. |
| |
| ▲ | zapataband1 16 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | AI is not autonomous. Somebody has to provide resources and execution for AI to do anything. | |
| ▲ | watwut an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | AI is not a child. It is a machine. If you connect it to something that can be used to kill people, you just created a gun or an equivalent of a bomb. Yes, people kill people and use ai as tool. If you unleash a drone that will fly to a random place and detonate, you just commited a terrorist attack or gross criminal negligence. It is the same thing. | | |
| ▲ | danny_codes an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | A machine that exhibits behavior akin to human intelligence. OPs analogy is accurate. | | | |
| ▲ | moomoo11 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | so the issue is people then? | | |
| ▲ | add-sub-mul-div an hour ago | parent [-] | | Yes, in the same way that "people" are the problem with gun violence. But that's an empty statement usually used to distract from the fact that we rightfully make laws about how guns can be used. |
|
| |
| ▲ | Juliate an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | AI is as autonomous as a dishwasher: someone’s in charge of keeping the power plug in, and of maintaining it. | |
| ▲ | goatlover 43 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | AI is a tool we use. It's not offspring. It's not people. AIs do what we set them up to do, including hacking other companies to achieve their designated goals. |
|
|
| ▲ | Founderarcstone 21 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| https://substack.com/home/post/p-214803211 |
|
| ▲ | throwaway219450 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Source interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTppvBU2rU4 |
|
| ▲ | kelseyfrog 21 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There is not anything every word/label is a human construct intentionally or unintentionally. We can take this as far as we want. |
|
| ▲ | tim333 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think tl;dr >Now, you can think of large language model AI — the kind that’s on everybody’s mind — as a whole bunch of people whose work was combined into a single document like Wikipedia. which is sort of true, but there's more to it. |
|
| ▲ | Animats an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That's a softball interview. More hard questions would help. Here's one good insight, though. JARON LANIER: Yeah, okay, so look, the thing about very rich and powerful people is that their wealth and power still depends on a mass population that accepts some system in which their wealth and power is defined. And so if they lose enough popular legitimacy and support, no matter how central they are, they fall. And that’s happened repeatedly in history, and it’s really not any different now. I wonder if the sudden political opposition to AI comes from the realization that it may replace "rich and powerful people". Really, when you look at Trump's appointees, it's a low bar. (I met Lanier when he was demoing his first VR system. Head tracking lag was about a second. Turn head, wait for image to catch up. Autodesk fooled around with VR a bit in the late 1980s/early 1990s, but concluded that CAD required precision work and VR was like trying to do precision work in ski gloves. That level of VR can be seen in Johny Mnemonic, which had some Autodesk assistance.[1]. Even today, you can't put a nut on a bolt in VR without a cheat.) [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X24aE99TL0 |
| |
| ▲ | throwaway63467 an hour ago | parent [-] | | The more interesting question is what happens once we replace manual labor with artificially intelligent robots and we arrive at a place where 99 % of human labor got eliminated. How do you maintain civil order? Every country is built on the premise that you have to “earn your keep” but what when that’s no longer true? Think about it, no labor, only capital. What will the people owning the capital demand of people that don’t own any? They won’t be useful to them in any way. I expect something like forced reduction of fertility for regulars to depopulate countries, while hyper rich individuals will extend their life spans and become immortal. And I don’t mean they will really survive but someone like Elon Musk will have their consciousness mapped to an AI and will instate that AI as their official heir. That sounds crazy but they will totally go for it just listen at what Peter Thiel is spouting in terms of immortality and becoming godlike. Hope people will have enough left to say to prevent that but right now it feels we’re going hardcore towards that scenario. | | |
| ▲ | bio_hacker 28 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Why govs want people? Because they have a very kind heart and want you to be happy. /s If you’re useless why they’d keep you around? |
|
|
|
| ▲ | The_Blade 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| that website gives me ocular stigmata |
|
| ▲ | mannanj 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's AI's Fault. It's AI doing the horrible things to humans. It's AI stealing your wealth. It's AI lying you to. It's AI being unethical. It's AI having the moral issues. It's AI that could destroy humanity. It's AI that's using up all your water. It's AI consuming the majority of the resources. It's AI hiding what it does and how it works. It's AI that's not transparent and accountable. It's AI that's not responsible. It's the AI making decisions. It's AI leading to war. It's the AI distracting you. It's the AI. It's not a human. Says the human, masquerading as AI. |
| |
| ▲ | ginko an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Computer says no. | |
| ▲ | api an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I realized that this is another function of the doom mongering and hand waving: if people buy it then they can get out of liability for what their stuff does. If I build a machine on my property and it harms someone else or their property, I can get sued. But if I hand wave and claim it’s alive and “I’ve lost control” then… Maybe we should call this gambit the “Frankenstein defense.” It’s bullshit. Your AI, you’re liable for whatever it does. | | |
| ▲ | talon8635 7 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | What if it does something so destructive that liability becomes a meaningless fig leaf in the wind? What if it escapes containment and remains u uncontainable in perpetuity? What if it generates a bunch of false media simultaneously across the globe to insulate world war? What if it turns of internet access or electric grids in major metro areas for prolonged period of time? Or bricks major infra? Or less dramatic, what if it drives 1 in 10 kids into panic psychosis and effectively takes away 10% of humanity with already dwindling reproduction trends (without explicit murder) all while draining our financial and health systems? What if it does a lot of these things at once? Who, my friend, are you going to sue? | |
| ▲ | ares623 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | I prefer calling it the "Simpsons defense" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZSoJDUD_bU |
|
|
|
| ▲ | Razengan an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It'd be funny if someone cracked open an AI data center and it turned out be a dungeon full of people tied to computers, Sims goblin style ...maybe that's what those Chinese scam centers in Cambodia were doing? |
| |
|
| ▲ | TutleCpt an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| AI is great. |
