As much as I dislike “AI” this is akin to stopping development of munitions. If we don’t continue to develop it we’ll be unable to defend against it.
oh good luck with that bernie… while he’s not wrong, there’s too much money passing hands for this to be a threat
You can’t ignore power. If AI is power, it must be developed or those who don’t do so, disempower themselves relative to those who do. We were born into a race for power that manifests from physics itself and how we distribute that power defines us.
This only gets worse when power is allowed to concentrate, which is the entire foundation of right wing political philosophy. Compete for power and the winner gets to do what they please.
The alternative is unity and empathy, which is the foundation of left wing philosophy, the basis for democracy, the will of founding fathers and was even the message of Christ himself (No, I’m not Christian). Disperse power evenly so that everyone gets some of what they please.
To choose the first is to accept cruelty, psychopathy, relentless conflict, destruction, war, hate and violence, even slavery, to force an order to things that is to the maximum benefit to the most powerful individuals but to the detriment of everyone else. It is brutal, risky, primitive and fragile.
The US doesn’t control what other competing nations do and this current administration is not capable of unity and empathy with other nations. It has no desire for it and no skillset to achieve it. To stop the development of AI now means watching competing nations, many whose interests are equally selfish, empower themselves with it.
If AI is power then it is imperative that it’s power be dispersed and not concentrated, so it serves the interests of each of us and not solely the interest of the few of us. That counts for both citizens of the US and nations of the world. Competing nations will not tolerate a power difference that becomes an existential threat and the ambitions of the corporate class will put the US in conflict with the world, a war it can not win. What hope does it have against China, the EU and United blocks of medium and small nations? The US has shown it cannot even defeat Iran and is now behind in the new age of drone warfare.
The US right wing has brought us into conflict with everyone to allow a small group of people the chance to chase a power fantasy, and it may be America’s downfall and the start of a new age of war.
I too can say the right thing consistently with no meaningful action!
I think Congress knows they have the backing of the vast majority of the voters, on this subject.
It could be more than hot air.
Let him cook.
This is playing into their hand. “Oh your tech is so amazing and powerful and must be paused!”
Nah. It’s a bullshit bubble that’s threatening to tear down world order, or what’s left of it.
If he can get senate action on AI then why can’t he get senate action on all the other plethora of crap happening to us right now?
He cant, but he wants to. Which is important.
We should never take something away from an action with good intentions, just because others want to stop him.
Thats not how we get the change in the end. Because someday it might succeed.
Any pause will have to be a global treaty; the unfortunate reality is that we’re in an arms race now, and despite Sanders’ threats otherwise, I don’t think there is going to be much will to pause in the US while China keeps developing.
And to be clear, I think it would be every wise to pause development and, afterwards, keep the pace slow. We know how to make “AI” more capable, but we don’t know how to make it stay aligned with human goals. The technology is useful and isn’t going anywhere, but that doesn’t mean we have to develop it as quickly as possible without regard to the real dangers it brings with it.
Order Nvidia and AMD to stop selling AI GPUs or whatever they’re called.
Which country is doing the ordering?
Any pause will have to be a global treaty
Which is why tech CEOs love to promote it. They know it’ll never happen.
We know how to make “AI” more capable, but we don’t know how to make it stay aligned with human goals.
“Alignment” is almost entirely a myth cooked up by AI companies who want to make their word generators sound scarier than they are. There’s no such thing: the next word generator generates next word. It’s unpredictable because it’s built that way. “Hallucination” and “going rogue”, all poor terms and pathetic attempts to fearmonger and humanize, are identical functions to “working” and “aligning”.
The technology… isn’t going anywhere
The “it’s just inevitable” cliche rears its ugly head again.
That cliche is the worst. If applied to anything else you can see how absurd it is. Like NFTs aren’t going anywhere, crime isn’t going anywhere, etc.
Except NFTs were never used to nearly even close to the same amount as AI, it had much less usecases and the one that did “catch on” was idiotic.
Crime is a symptom of a problem, not a technological advancement, apples and oranges.
AI the tool is never going away in the same way the internet is never going away. (Barring our entire civilization collapses and we lose knowledge/connectivity/life lmao)
“AI is never going away” neither did NFTs nor crime, nor anything else really. We should try to stop these awful companies from doing awful things.
The point of the “its not going away” comment is because a shocking number of people think the solution to AI is to, I dunno, delete it.
As a technology, it is out in the world. It isn’t going away any more than electricity or the internet. So any solutions to the real problems with AI that are essentially “make it go away” are essentially nonsense. Might as well propose wishing it away with a genie.
“It’s not going away” is not equivalent to “there’s nothing we can do to solve the problems”; it just means that the solution has to be in a framework where it is implemented alongside AI.
I agree?
Alignment is a real thing, though it can be a less than apt description. Mostly the goals you write out and the goals you want to happen not being the same thing. You can also have alignment issues where the dataset doesn’t match the real data in some way and the classifications break down. (I am not an AI defender I am very anti-AI)
Your opinion is borne from lack of knowledge about the topic you’re trying to discuss, similar to an anti-vaxxer attempting to discuss the dangers of mRNA vaccines.
Fix your lack of knowledge or don’t; that’s your call, but if you care about discussing this topic somewhat intelligently, you should probably put in some effort to understand it.
Wow. What an awful person.
I said several things so how about you actually address them, instead of resorting to an insult and vaguely telling me to “do my research”?
Do you deny this latest wave of companies doing the exact same routine is a PR stunt, or that companies badly want regulatory capture, or what?
I meant no insult, truly. You just don’t have the minimum required knowledge to discuss this intelligently. There’s no shame in that; no one can know everything.
I can’t know the motives of anyone, but I can say it’s at least plausible that the people working on the frontier models want an excuse to slow down that doesn’t give an advantage to other countries and companies, and also doesn’t put them in the crosshairs of investors and board members.
You apparently still internalize LLMs as fancy Markov chains, which tells me that you don’t have a working grasp to discuss the topic, even at the laymen level we’re at.
These hacking events may be “PR Stunts”, but the “stunt” part would be leaving a known vulnerability as a path to the wider Internet instead of making it physically impossible to break out, not the hacking of other websites. No one credible is disputing that these models are capable of hacking.
I meant no insult
Uh-huh. You compared me to an antivaxxer , implying that people who disagree with you don’t believe in science or technology - the same reason you felt the need to throw in the “inevitability” cliche. Which I do not buy, and somebody claiming to understand the technology should never repeat.
Later, you say anyone who disagrees with you just feels “desperate” and “threatened.” You’re really pulling everything from the “I am rational and you are neurotic” playbook aren’t you.
I can’t know the motives of anyone, but I can say it’s at least plausible that the people working on the frontier models want an excuse to slow down that doesn’t give an advantage to other countries and companies, and also doesn’t put them in the crosshairs of investors and board members.
It’s all the same song and dance. Dario Amodei screams “hold me back!” because he loves pretending his product is Great and Powerful.
Why do these developers never talk about real harms like the environmental damage they cause? How about the psychosis they are liable to fall into?
It’s pretty obvious they’re just doing marketing, knowingly or not. And these are smart people who should know better.
@XLE I reported the little troll.
Computer science is still science. You distrust the experts in the field based on what? Something you saw on social media? Certainly not your own expertise, that much is clear.
Don’t move the goalposts. No one is claiming that “AI” doesn’t have downsides. That’s different than your original claim that they didn’t do what they appear to do.
I don’t suppose you happen to be in a field threatened by AI? In my anecdotal experience, the people that desperately want to pretend AI is all a scam are actually worried about the opposite, and their job. (A real concern I’m in no way trying to minimize.)
Removed by mod
I can’t tell if you’re reading what I’m writing. I mention CEOs twice and you assert I’m not listening to “The Experts”.
No one is claiming that “AI” doesn’t have downsides.
You mean climate damage and psychosis?
Zero of the “experts” in your strained theory about looking for excuses to “pause” AI ever talk about them. It’s almost like they don’t want to imply their product is unworthy of all the hype, doomerism and fearmongering.
It’s beyond “an arms race.” AI has become a commodity that’s everywhere and it’s being used and developed by zillions of completely different groups all over the world with wildly varying use cases and completely different goals.
At this point, trying to ban it would be like trying to ban dandelions from growing.
The groups doing frontier research with the appropriate funding are few enough that a global pause would be possible, and useful.
I agree that a ban would be impossible, and counterproductive even if it were possible.
Except when you think about if a ban were actually implemented it would absolutely be pro-entrenched companies like OpenAI and Anthropic and open weight models could be banned outright, I’ve already seen well-intentioned but misguided “experts” saying exactly that, BAN open weight models and pause further development, who would that benefit directly?
What Senate action will he take? Have a hearing when the senators will try to get sound bites in for reelection?
At this point US Senat actions (especially those by Democrats) seem even less effective than European serious concern.
EU actually gets changes done tho.
Sure, but the serious concern is the least efficient tool they have.
Bernie Sanders is a politician, he should tell the public how he plans to add safety mechanisms and safeguards to AI. Granting the government and corporations full authority and control over it while limiting public access is how you turn AI into a digital nuclear weapon.
Ban the slop easy as, they’re breaking a tonne of laws, and they’re pushing their costs onto everyone else.
ban what? ban AI?
“Data center moratorium”
- addresses concrete problems
- promises concrete solutions
- easy to target the biggest offenders
“gUaRdRaiLs”
- addresses vague problems
- requires undefined solutions
- helps the biggest offenders
- acts as free PR for the industry
Cap LLMs to 1 Trillion parameters, can utilize no more than 384GiB of (V)RAM.
Offenders go to jail (corporations charged as a criminal enterprise), all equipment seized and destroyed.
If these AI glazers really believed that AI is the threat they claim it is, then we should treat it the way we’d treat corporations if they tried developing their own nuclear weapons.
I rarely see a criticism of Bernie Sanders that isn’t some form of perfect solution fallacy and this comment is not one of them.
I’m sorry, like “Yes” but also, SIGH.
Cuz like;
-
He’s been doing this 70 years and he’s said it all already.
-
He’s been doing this 70 years and he’s too old to be the guy directing AI.
He’s been doing this 70 years and he’s too old to be the guy directing AI.
So why is he getting involved in AI?
-
Bernie has been compromised by AI evangelists and PR stunts.
As a reminder, Bernie believes AI should be privately owned but with a large public stake in it (a sovereign wealth fund), which effectively means the US government would have a vested interest in keeping the unprofitable part of Elon Musk’s industries — the CSAM-generating ones — profitable.
The senator says recent rogue-agent incidents show AI firms are losing control of their own systems.
Those were PR stunts.
You’ll notice Bernie isn’t even talking about regulating data centers any more, which is concrete and actionable.
He’s just repeating what AI companies say to promote their product as being better than it really is, and encourage corporate capture that will guarantee a corporate monopoly.
More than 1,300 employees from the world’s leading tech companies just signed an open letter…
Yeah, OpenAI and Anthropic executives signed it because it is good for their business.
Bernie definitely disappointed me with his take on AI. I believe it is criminal and everyone responsible for the theft and misappropriation of humanity’s creative workforce should be in prison, forever incapable from profiting from this egregious act of self service.
This is a fucking stock manipulation ploy, just like every ‘rogue agent’ AI scare. The companies are not making promised advancement and their promised AGI dreams are dead. What better than to cook up an excuse that ‘le ebil goberment’ made us stop research than to face the investors who will ask what happened to all the money. Diffuse the stock bubble more slowly instead of a full on high speed crash.
I like Bernie and hate AI, but I fear this is a bit pointless… Does he even have enough power and/or colleagues to do anything, anything at all? Same thing as with most things he shouts about, healthcare and whatnot. He says the right things but with the current insanity and insane system in the US, hes never going to get anything done.
Of course I am not suggesting that he should stop. I think he should keep going, shouting at the things. But his threats are starting to be a bit hollow. Sadly.
I dont know what my point is, I just despair at everything these days. Plargh.
