zlacker

>>staran+(OP)
I was hopeful for a private-industry approach to AI safety, but it looks unlikely now, and due to the slow pace of state investment in public AI R&D, all approaches to AI safety look unlikely now.

Safety research on toy models will continue to provide developments, but the industry expectation appears to be that emergent properties puts a low ceiling on what can be learned about safety without researching on cutting edge models.

Altman touted the governance structure of OpenAI as a mechanism for ensuring the organisation's prioritisation of safety, but the reports of internal reallocation away from safety towards keeping ChatGPT running under load concern me. Now the board has demonstrated that it was technically capable but insufficiently powerful to keep these interests in line, it seems unclear how any safety-oriented organisation, including Anthropic, could avoid the accelerationist influence of funders.

>>MattHe+bx
There are no emergent properties, just a linear increase in knowledge that can be retrieved.

- It can't plan

- It can't do arithmetic

- It can't reason

- It can approximately retrieve knowledge with a natural language query (there are some issues with this, but it's very good)

- It can encode data into natural languages and other modalities

I'm not worried about it, I am worried about how badly people have misunderstood what it can do and then attempted to use it for things that matter.

But I'm not surprised.

>>sgt101+Pz1
This is incorrect. For example the ability to translate between languages is emergent. Also gpt4 can do arithmetic better than the average person. Especially considering the process it arrives at the computation is via intuition basically vs algorithmic. Btw just as an aide the newer models can also write code to do certain tasks, like arithmetic.