Remix.run Logo
▲ fallingfrog an hour ago

Lots of people seem to have the bizarre opinion that companies like openai declare their own products to be unsafe as some kind of marketing stunt.

Ok- so when is the last time you saw an auto company decide not to release its new car on the grounds that some tragic engineering error was made and the cars were not safe to drive? If the company did that do you imagine it would be good for business?

I'm trying to understand the logic here.

▲RunSet an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I would consider it more "bizarre" to assume that Sam Altman was telling the truth about anything.

https://web.archive.org/web/20240112010809/https://www.sfchr...

▲symfoniq an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Car companies sell mostly the same car every year. They don’t have billions (or trillions) of dollars of debt riding on the next model they release being substantially better and cheaper (closer to profitability) than the previous one.

These AI companies have been selling AGI as coming any day for a while now. If it doesn’t arrive soon, the safety angle may be the only spin that keeps the massive (and required) investments pouring in.

If instead the narrative became that LLM progress was slowing, we’d almost certainly be looking at the next global recession.

At this point, there is too much money in AI for the truth to have much of a chance.

▲antihipocrat 29 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because they declare that their product is unsafe regularly, which gains massive exposure on every news outlet worldwide, then they release the model anyway with zero negative repercussions.

What's with so many people using bad analogies to try and explain simple topics?

Last time this happened: GPT - 4 https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/mar/17/openai-sa...

▲adfgaiu an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Motorcycle manufacturers have been known to do so. Riding a motorcycle is thrilling in part because it is dangerous. The fact that powerful motorcycles are so difficult to control that most people have no business owning one is absolutely used to make them sound cool and desirable.

For instance, this article repeatedly mentions danger and the need for absolute focus and control:

https://www.triumphmotorcycles.co.uk/for-the-ride/news/inspi...

There is also a parallel (though not a very close one) to "pacing the frontier": there's a gentleman's agreement that limits the top speed of motorcycles to 300 kph (186 mph) because of concern that faster bikes would be unsafe enough to bring about a regulatory crackdown.

▲cobbzilla an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because no car company would ever announce they had an unsafe car. They’d fix the problem and announce an awesome car.

▲alexfortin an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Hype: you tell the world you alone have a very powerful and potentially dangerous product, and you're the only one who can be trusted keeping it safe.

▲Dylan16807 37 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> so when is the last time you saw an auto company decide not to release its new car on the grounds that some tragic engineering error was made and the cars were not safe to drive?

How about we actually try to make it sound cool? They're not releasing the new car because the horsepower was too much, they need more time to get it under control.

I could easily see a car company doing that.

▲viraptor 42 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Different type of business. Many car companies release new cars showing you how much more powerful and implied dangerous they are. Both in capabilities and design style. In the US (other places too , but especially) they also get much bigger with less visibility which gets double dangerous. But the sentiment they're going for is pretty close - "you want this powerful thing, don't you?"

▲adfgaiu 41 minutes ago | parent [-]

>In the US they also get much bigger with less visibility.

Those are usually presented as an improvement in safety. And they are—for the people inside. Not so much for everyone else.

▲zugi 25 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's perfectly safe for YOU, the CUSTOMER.

It's just so powerful that, like, the WORLD can't handle it, man!

▲kennywinker an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

At the moment, their main "customer" is investors, not users. But even users want to use the most dangerous model, because dangerous is just another word for powerful.

Sports cars are advertised with how fast they can accelerate from time to time, or tesla's "ludicrous mode" - that is them advertising how dangerous it is.

▲kipper89 24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Why do you think they would announce this then?

They know what they're doing, even if you don't.

▲zmgsabst an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

There are cars that market based on only being track legal — and even more that market on requiring being tuned down for street safety.

Most sports cars do the second, exactly like OpenAI.