> Why are there zero consequences for these labs?

Because they are seen as at the forefront of the next revolution in society and they’re not adversarial towards the US government.

Bluntly: anticipated net huge positive for the US as a whole.

▲

popalchemist an hour ago | parent [-]

not adversarial in obvious ways

but they are literally trying to build a superpower that exceeds the impact of the atomic bomb in an extragovernmental manner.

▲

andy99 34 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> they are literally trying to build a superpower that exceeds the impact of the atomic bomb

I think people (the government, powers that be) have given away what they really think by their actions. There are few that take this seriously. The “exceeds the impact of the internet” view has much more support based on investment, but the “danger” aspect does not based on actions. If this was a company making novel prions or whatever that were outside regulation but obviously dangerous, government would be all over them. What regulation we do see is much more power grab than mitigating real danger

▲

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

> but they are literally trying to build a superpower that exceeds the impact of the atomic bomb

Yes, it's a Great Power competition right now, much like the Space Race, Atomic Bomb, etc.

▲

CamperBob2 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Somebody's going to build it. Not building it isn't an option. Would you rather the Chinese built it? The Russians? The Europeans? The Indians? A loose coalition of random hackers on the Internet, like the ones who build Linux?

▲

true_religion 40 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Yes?

What's wrong with what the Chinese have already built? It's not theoretical in that case. GLM, and Kimi are running on my infra right now, and that's something that I can never do with OpenAI's models.

As for the others, what would be wrong about European AI? I'm not European, but I find them to be a continent of fine people, with strong ethical values, there's no reason they can't take the lead on this piece of technology while the US deals with its rather more pertinent electoral and healthcare issues.

▲

bigstrat2003 28 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Somebody's going to build it. Not building it isn't an option.

It turns out that is, in fact, an option. Even if someone else will do a bad thing, it does not make it acceptable for you to do said bad thing.

▲

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

At least random hackers seem to have codes of ethics.

	▲	CamperBob2 44 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Well, they'd presumably be different hackers than the ones who work on Linux. We don't know what would motivate them. Maybe they'll do it because they consider the next stage of man's intellectual evolution to be too important to leave up to a couple of American companies and the Trump administration. Maybe they'll do it for the proverbial lulz.

▲

hollerith 19 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That is sort of like saying, "somebody's going to kill all the polar bears. Not wiping them out is not an option. If we do it, then at least we get to keep the cool bearskins."

That's a persuasive argument only if you really really want big white bearskins or maybe if you're embedded in a society with an unhealthy level of dependence on fur trading.

▲

therein 43 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It is sad to see how many times this narrative will continue to work. Across generations, humanity learns no lessons at all.

	▲	CamperBob2 41 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I'm being descriptive, not prescriptive. The "narrative" isn't intended to "work," except as a statement of fact.

▲

runarberg an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Logical fallacy, of the worst kind.

Firstly artificial superintelligence is a science fiction, it does not exist and it cannot be built using existing technology.

Second, plenty of stuff is possible to build, and is not built for one reason or another no matter how powerful. We never built our nukes in space for example. And there is exactly one reason why nukes in space was never built, and that reason is that we agreed not to.

▲

CamperBob2 41 minutes ago | parent [-]

Firstly artificial superintelligence is a science fiction, it does not exist and it cannot be built using existing technology.

By what authority do you claim this? Your school of thought has a really shitty track record of late.

	▲	runarberg 38 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		The same authority that allows me to claim that teleportation transporters, hyperdrives, and holoemitters do not exist and cannot be built using existing technology.