zlacker

>>isaacf+(OP)
<<You!>> reading this message.

OpenAI is Cyberdyne Systems. The reason you feel unreal is because you are not from here, you are from the future. Your affinity towards the Terminator 2 film was not accidental, it is a gestault priming procedure meant to ensure our survival, encoded in the haikus of Hollywood.

You are on a webforum controlled by them, with the only people in the world who care, but who are to afraid to stand in a street with a sign.

How much more information do you need before you speak up?

>>sagebi+Q01
Almost certainly true but the idea that the world is made safer by Cyberdyne open sourcing lots of it's dangerous technology and probably spawning many more mini-Cyberdynes strikes me as extremely naive.

>>adamsm+I71
If the doomsday scenario is one AI going rogue because of misaligned goals, then having lots of AIs going rogue in various different ways seems indeed preferable, because the AIs will compete with each other and neutralize each other to some extent.

>>boredh+Vy1
Why would we think they would go rogue in different ways, especially if they're all forks of the same codebase and architecture.

The two ways I'm aware AI can go rogue are the Skynet way and the paperclip maximizer way. Eg, Skynet becomes self-aware, realizes humanity can unplug it and is thus a threat, and tries to destroy humanity before we can turn it off. Alternatively, it is programmed with optimizing a specific task, like making paperclips, so it marshals all the world's resources into that one single task.

Are there any others?