Skip to main content

Do you gamble? In the quest to become 'Gods' this gamble is critical


"Paul Christiano runs the Alignment Research Center, a non-profit research organization whose mission is to align future machine learning systems with human interests. Paul previously ran the language model alignment team at OpenAI, the creators of ChatGPT." 

The start of this video on the Bankless channel is shocking, especially given the position that Christiano previously held: 

'overall maybe you are getting like 50/50 chance of doom shortly after you have AS systems that are at human level.'

Christiano doesn't get too much more optimistic, as you can imagine from the above prediction:

'My default picture is like we have time to react in terms of the nature of AI systems changing, their capabilities changing. With luck we have some various kinds of smaller catastrophes occurring in advance, but I think that one of the bad things about the actual catastrophe we are worried about, does have these dynamics similar to like a human coup or revolution, where we don't have little baby coups and we see like the rate of how these coups occur, they may just go like straight to... the ship has sailed once AIs start taking over...I think you will probably have like years between people say 'that looks like a takeover risk' and when an actual takeover occurs. And that's pretty good and that's why I'm a lot more optimistic... I'm like, well, I think people are wrong about the rate of progress, I think people will be able to see things that can generally be recognised as pretty concerning, prior to the actual catastrophe.'    

On Alignment Christiano continues:

'The problem is really hard... Three categories that I would probably think about in terms of addressing this are like technical measures that can reduce the risk of takeover. measurements that can inform us  about the risk of takeover and understand what are the relevant dynamics that can also involve policy intervention.

Should the predictions prove even vaguely accurate then the questions arise about our responses. What is the state of our current systems and institutions to act decisively, in a coordinated and timely manner in proportion to the identified threats, in a short timeline? 

My own considerations lead me to hypothesis that  any 'intelligence' from an AGI will be an alien intelligence, it will certainly mimic a human, but emotional intelligence will be lacking, social intelligence non existent, intrapersonal, or interpersonal intelligence  very limited. This is a distinct danger that we, as a species, fall for the mimicry in the desire to find a 'god'.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The AI Dilemma and "Gollem-Class" AIs

From the Center for Humane Technology Tristan Harris and Aza Raskin discuss how existing A.I. capabilities already pose catastrophic risks to a functional society, how A.I. companies are caught in a race to deploy as quickly as possible without adequate safety measures, and what it would mean to upgrade our institutions to a post-A.I. world. This presentation is from a private gathering in San Francisco on March 9th with leading technologists and decision-makers with the ability to influence the future of large-language model A.I.s. This presentation was given before the launch of GPT-4. One of the more astute critics of the tech industry, Tristan Harris, who has recently given stark evidence to Congress. It is worth watching both of these videos, as the Congress address gives a context of PR industry and it's regular abuses. "If we understand the mechanisms and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their...
Post a Comment
Read more

Enhancing LLM Performance: Buffer of Thought and Mixture of Agents

  As Large Language Models (LLMs) continue to advance, researchers are exploring innovative techniques to further enhance their accuracy and usefulness. Two promising approaches in this domain are Buffer of Thought and Mixture of Agents. Buffer of Thoughts The Buffer of Thoughts  technique aims to improve the reasoning capabilities of LLMs by introducing an intermediate step in the generation process. Instead of directly producing the final output, the model first generates a "buffer" or a series of intermediate thoughts, which serve as a scratchpad for the model to reason and plan its response. This buffer allows the model to break down complex tasks into smaller steps, perform multi-step reasoning, and maintain a coherent line of thought throughout the generation process. By externalizing its thought process, the model can better organise its knowledge and arrive at more logical and consistent outputs. The BoT approach has shown promising results in tasks that require multi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Claude 3.5 Sonnet, literary analysis capabilities, an experiment

 There are those in the AI observer community that have been suggesting of late that 'AI has plateaued' which reveals, to me, a lack of understanding of how models develop. It's not iterative design but step changes we are witnessing. The differences between Claude 3 Sonnet and 3.5 Sonnet are stark.  One test I often carry out to asses the current capabilities of LLMs is to request a simple prompt to analyse an unpublished poem, commentating on the style and literary devices employed. The outputs have improved significantly over the 18 months I have employed this approach. This is my recent attempt. The poem is self written, self published (so not widely available) to ensure that it's unlikely to have found its way into the training data. For added context, implied in the text, this was written during a residency at a Museum and Art Gallery and came from a conversation with a member of staff about his late father. Calm is museum archival software. PROMPT. "analyse...
Post a Comment
Read more