Anders Lindström

Karma: 42

Anders Lindström 9 Jul 2024 15:54 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: RedMan’s comment on: An AI Manhattan Project is Not Inevitable
For starters it could be used as a diplomatic tool with tremendous bargin power as well as a deterrent to anyone that wanted to challenge US post war dominance in all fields.

Now imagine what a machine that is better in solving any problem in all of science than all the smartest people and scientists in world. Would not this machine give the owners EXTREME advantages in all things related to government/military/intelligence?!

Anders Lindström 9 Jul 2024 15:33 UTC
5 points
0
in reply to: Seth Herd’s comment on: An AI Manhattan Project is Not Inevitable
Well, how many of in congress and the senate heard about the Manhattan project?
“Keeping 120,000 people quiet would be impossible; therefore only a small privileged cadre of inner scientists and officials knew about the atomic bomb’s development. In fact, Vice-President Truman had never heard of the Manhattan Project until he became President Truman.”
https://www.ushistory.org/us/51f.asp
When it comes to the scientists, we have no idea if the work they do in “private” companies is a part of a bigger government led effort. Which would be the most efficient way I suppose.

I don’t really understand why some people seem to get so upset about the idea that the government/military is involved in developing cutting edge technology. Like AI is some thing that governments/militaries are not aloud to touch? The military industrial complex has been and will always be involved in this kind of endeavors.

Anders Lindström 7 Jul 2024 10:45 UTC
0 points
−6
on: An AI Manhattan Project is Not Inevitable
To be clear, I am confident that governments and militaries will be extremely interested in AI.
It makes perfect sense that it will turn into a Manhattan project, and it probably (p>0.999999...) already has. The idea that the government, military, and intelligence agencies have not yet received the memo about AI/AGI/ASI is beyond naive.

Just like the extreme advantages of being the first to develop a nuclear bomb, being the first to achieve AGI might carry the same EXTREME advantages.

Anders Lindström 5 Jul 2024 12:50 UTC
3 points
0
on: Finding the Wisdom to Build Safe AI
Are we really sure that we should model AI’s in the image of humans? We can apparently not align people with people, so why would a human-replica be that different? If we train an AI to behave like a human, why do we expect the AI to NOT behave like a human? Like it or not, but part of what makes us human is lying, stealing, and violence.

”Fifty-two people lost their lives to homicide globally every hour in 2021, says new report from UN Office on Drugs and Crime”. https://unis.unvienna.org/unis/en/pressrels/2023/uniscp1165.html

Anders Lindström 28 Jun 2024 16:02 UTC
2 points
−18
on: Anders Lindström’s Shortform
I am starting to believe that military use of AI is perhaps the best and fastest way to figure out if large scale AI alignment is possible at all. Since the military will actively seek to develop AI’s that kills humans, they must also figure out how not to kill ALL humans. I hope the military will be open with their successes and failures about what works and do no work.

Anders Lindström 26 Jun 2024 23:28 UTC
1 point
0
on: Childhood and Education Roundup #6: College Edition
The other was taught by a Harvard prof. He informed us TFs that an A is the default grade. A- would require justification.
Great post!
But can this be true? I don’t care if it is fair or not to do so. I just wonder if Harvard would be so stupid to destroy their own brand, If people that are hiring Harvard students start to understand that the grades do no reflect the students knowledge in a subject even a little bit it can go south pretty fast.

Anders Lindström 23 Jun 2024 22:22 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: Dagon’s comment on: Anders Lindström’s Shortform
Thanks for pointing me to Zvi’s work

Anders Lindström 23 Jun 2024 22:20 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: Amalthea’s comment on: Anders Lindström’s Shortform
Yes, I meant an LLM in the context of a user that fed in a query of his or her problem and got a novel solution back. There is always debatable what a “real” or “hard” problem is, but as a lower bound I mean something that people here at LW would raise an eyebrow or two if the LLM solved. Otherwise there are as you mention plenty of stuff/problems that “custom” AI/machine learning models have solved for a long time.

Anders Lindström 23 Jun 2024 11:03 UTC
3 points
0
on: Anders Lindström’s Shortform
I have yet to read a post here on LW were someone write about a frontier model that have solved a “real” problem were the person really had tried for a long(-ish) time to solve it but failed and then the AI solved it for them, like a research problem, a coding problem, a math problem, a medical problem, a personal problem etc. Has anyone experienced this yet?

Anders Lindström 22 Jun 2024 11:11 UTC
1 point
0
on: AI is now a curiosity race
What you say in your post is common sense. Unfortunately there is no room for common sense questions in the race for AGI/ASI. From what people in the industry say about their own future predictions, AGI/ASI seems potentially VERY dangerous. However, we can not stop for a second and think/talk about it.
Where I think the biggest misalignment is right now, is not the AI models vs Humans. GPT, Claude, Gemini et al. are all very well aligned with humans. What is NOT aligned at all with humans are the AI companies plans for the future.
At least in western countries, minute details of civil laws or tax code with a p(doom)<0.00000000000000000001 can be publicly debated for years before they are implemented. But with a technology that by AI insiders have been predicted to have a p(doom)>0.05, we (the people) should just accept that risk and be quiet, because we are too stupid to understand that all deaths are not equal...

Are there any alternatives to AGI/ASI for solving big problems. Here is a quiz:

Cure cancer?
A) AGI/ASI
B) Stopping eating ultra processed food

End world hunger?
A) AGI/ASI
B) Redistribution of food

Stop (human influenced) climate change?
A) AGI/ASI
B) Stop buying every little thing you see on Alibaba and Amazon

Stop microplastic pollution of the oceans?
A) AGI/ASI
B) Stop buying every little thing you see on Alibaba and Amazon

Anders Lindström 20 Jun 2024 14:57 UTC
−1 points
−2
in reply to: William_S’s comment on: Ilya Sutskever created a new AGI startup
Come on now, there is nothing to worry about here. They are just going to “move fast and break things”...

Anders Lindström 20 Jun 2024 11:59 UTC
1 point
0
on: Actually, Power Plants May Be an AI Training Bottleneck.
Don’t worry, fusion power is just 10 years away...

This paper is perhaps old news for most of you interested in energy, but I find it to be a good conversation starter when it comes to what kind of energy system we should aim for.

Anders Lindström 20 Jun 2024 11:39 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: momom2’s comment on: OpenAI #8: The Right to Warn
For the record. I do not mean to single out Altman. I am talking in general about leading figures (i.e. Altman et al.) in the AI space for which Altman have become a convenient proxy since he is a very public figure.

Anders Lindström 18 Jun 2024 22:07 UTC
3 points
3
in reply to: O O’s comment on: OpenAI #8: The Right to Warn
Current median p(doom) among Ai scientists seem to be 5-10%. How can it NOT be reckless to pursue something without extreme caution that is believed by people with the most knowledge in the field to be close to a round of Russian roulette for humankind?
Imagine for a second that I am a world leading scientist dabbling with viruses at home that potentially could give people eternal life and health, but that I publicly would state that “based on my current knowledge and expertise there is maybe a 10% risk that I accidently wipeout all humans in the process, because I have no real idea how to control the virus”. Would you then:

A) Call me a reckless idiot, send a SWAT team that put me behind bars, and destroy my lab and other labs that might be dabbling with the same biotech.
B) Say “let the boy play”.

Anders Lindström 18 Jun 2024 13:15 UTC
2 points
1
in reply to: xpym’s comment on: OpenAI #8: The Right to Warn
Of course they are not idiots, but I am talking about the pressure to produce results fast without having doomers and skeptics holding them back. A 1,2 or 3 year delay for one party could mean that they loose.
If it would have been publicly known that the Los Alamos team were building a new bomb capable of destroying cities and that they were not sure if the first detonation could lead to an uncontrollable chain reaction destroying earth, don’t you think there would have been quite a lot of debate and a long delay in the Manhattan project?
If the creation of AGI is one of the biggest events on earth since the advent of life, and that those who get it first can (will) be the all-power full masters, why would that not entice people to take bigger risks than they otherwise would have?

Anders Lindström 18 Jun 2024 10:07 UTC
4 points
−15
on: OpenAI #8: The Right to Warn
I commented on the post Ilya Sutskever and Jan Leike resign from OpenAI [updated] and received quite a lot disagreement (-18). Since then Aschenbrenner have posted his report and been vocal about his beliefs that it is imperative for the security of US (and the rest of the western world...) that US beats China in the AGI race i.e. AI tech is about military capabilities.
So, do many of you still disagree with my old comment? If so, then I am curios to know why you believe that what I wrote in the old comment is so far fetched?

The old comment:
”Without resorting to exotic conspiracy theories, is it that unlikely to assume that Altman et al. are under tremendous pressure from the military and intelligence agencies to produce results to not let China or anyone else win the race for AGI? I do not for a second believe that Altman et al. are reckless idiots that do not understand what kind of fire they might be playing with, that they would risk wiping out humanity just to beat Google on search. There must be bigger forces at play here, because that is the only thing that makes sense when reading Leike’s comment and observing Open AI’s behavior.”

Anders Lindström 12 Jun 2024 19:30 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: Andrew Burns’s comment on: Anders Lindström’s Shortform
Just wait until more countries that do not share western values get their hands on tools like this. I think that the only way that social media can survive is mandatory ID. If Airbnb can do it, I am sure Meta, X, Snap etc. etc. can do it. And… call me old fashioned, but I rather not share ANY personal information with ANY intelligence service

Anders Lindström 12 Jun 2024 19:24 UTC
2 points
0
in reply to: Vladimir_Nesov’s comment on: Anders Lindström’s Shortform
Huawei claim they are catching up on Nvidia: https://www.huaweicentral.com/ascend-910b-ai-chip-outstrips-nvidia-a100-by-20-in-tests-huawei/

Anders Lindström 12 Jun 2024 11:30 UTC
1 point
0
on: Anders Lindström’s Shortform
The heat is on! It seems that the export restrictions on Nvidia GPUs have had little to no effect on Chinese companies abilities to make frontier AI models. What will the next move from US be now? https://kling-ai.com/

Anders Lindström’s Shortform

Anders Lindström12 Jun 2024 11:30 UTC

2 points

11 comments1 min readLW link

Anders Lindström

An­ders Lind­ström’s Shortform

Anders Lindström’s Shortform