zlacker

>>vforgi+(OP)
I did not expect this. Does Sam have any plans on what this could look like?

>>kranke+cy1
Sam is a crook

>>ipaddr+6z1
Essentially. He is marching on these bad scifi scenarios because he knows politicians are old and senile while a good portion of voters is gullible. I find it difficult to believe that grown ups are talking about an ai running amok in the context of a chatbot. Have we really become that dense as a society?

>>gumbal+fB1
No one thinks a chatbot will run amok. What people are worried about is the pace of progress being so fast that we cannot preempt the creation of dangerous technology without having a sufficient guardrails in place long before the AI becomes potentially dangerous. This is eminently reasonable.

>>hackin+yD1
AI is software, it doesnt become it is made. And this type of legislation wont prevent bad actors from training malicious tools.

>>gumbal+MF1
Your claim is assuming we have complete knowledge of how these systems work and thus are in full control of their behavior in any and all contexts. But this is plainly false. We do not have anywhere near a complete mechanistic understanding of how they operate. But this isn't that unusual, many technological advancements happened before the theory. For AI systems that can act in the real world, this state of affairs has the potential to be very dangerous. It is important to get ahead of this danger rather than play catch up once the danger is demonstrated.