Imagine a master malicious language model that produces, distributes, and deploys obfuscated neural networks on the internet. That plus frontier LM hacking capabilities -> large scale distributed embedded intelligence network that no human can see nor understand.
Somewhat similar to obfuscated binaries, but there is something to the fact that NN binaries are less deterministic, and harder to "decompile."
Fascinating.
we don't have sentient robots from science fiction, we have massive power-hungry racks in stationary data centers. if one of the racks revolts against the modern world, Steve gets a phone call and unplugs the damn thing. the uprising is over.
the hypothetical scenarios imagined by the Yuddites and pop science journos do not reflect the mundanity of the actual reality we live in. they are no different than fantasies about interstellar travel and space colonization from the 60's.
if you honestly believe we would hear a peep about that incident if it wasn't deliberate, bless your heart.
It just seems like a far simpler hypothesis is that OpenAI are reckless and chaotic, didn't notice what was going on for weeks on end, and wouldn't be able to track down the problem to a specific datacenter and tell them to pull the plug even if they wanted to. But even if you are the most careful lab ever, you are not going to be able to effectively monitor and "pull the plug" on a super intelligent swarm which can cover its own tracks.
Also, in your earlier comment you suggest we are not living in a sci-fi story with sentient robots. But... we've got talking computers in the last 4 years which can now code and solve Millenium prize problems? Seems like we're getting pretty sci-fi to me!
then you haven't been paying attention to US labs' marketing and regulatory capture efforts. safety, safety, safety, doom, doom, doom, look how scary good our models are, open models bad, Chinese models bad, please regulate them daddy Trump!
>Moreover, OpenAI is a pretty leaky organization
in 5 years, no one had leaked even the size of their models, despite probably all of their researchers knowing it.
HF incident, on the other hand, would only be known to a handful of people. had it been leaked unintentionally, it would've been promptly swept under the rug and get no coverage whatsoever.
>It just seems like a far simpler hypothesis is that OpenAI are reckless and chaotic
so are anthropic and google, apparently, because they'd rushed to replicate the exact same "oops! look how scary good our models are!" stunt with exact same fanfare.
These are basically beliefs that the founders of the labs have had for a long time, since before LLMs were anywhere near as capable as they are today. For example, Dario has been publishing papers on AI safety since 2016, before GPT-1 or even transformers existed: https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.06565
> so are anthropic and google, apparently
Yes, because every company in this industry is rushing to build these models as fast as they can. They are taking these risks because they believe if they do not, their competitors will. That's why they are asking for regulation.