But over time I started recognizing a lot of the same usernames, and it really just hit me that you guys are some of the most empathetic and loving people I’ve come across on the internet […]
Totally agree. I've been on Lemmygrad since before GenZedong was quarantined on Reddit. There were only a few of us, but I could immediately recognize a few other users when I made posts. Almost every conversation has been great here. It's something I didn't notice on any other centralized social network. And the fact that this community feels like an authentic community is also incredible.
This might be a super sappy post, but you know what, I don’t care. Making the switch from Reddit to lemmygrad was the best social media decision I ever made […]
While this may be a "sappy" post, I think these posts are necessary for people who use Lemmygrad to understand that it has an impact on the lives of other comrades. Many people come to this community for advice or just to vent. It's something that would be impossible on Reddit because of the toxic nature and dark patterns that hide all the most successful social networks to succeed.
any user who fails to do so will be found guilty of liberalism
Dammit, I'm late :c
Happy birthday anyways! @Oppo@lemmygrad.ml
In this case, perhaps using AdNauseam could be useful for you.
It's sad to see this, but I'm not surprised. Ultra-nationalist Indians usually have this attitude on all social networks…
Fair enough 😅 I know the participants are cringe, but I have shared it because I would like to hear your opinion from a Marxist perspective. GeoHot is an accelerationist and Connor I think tries to be "apolitical", you know... lol
Anyway, I've put in the description of the post a summary of the transcript in case someone wants to know what they say without having to watch the video.
What’s more, any countries that try to put brakes on AI development will quickly find themselves at a disadvantage from countries that don’t. For this reason alone, AI will be seen as a national security concern by all major nations
In fact, we have seen that Americans are becoming increasingly fearful of AIs, in contrast to the Chinese, who generally trust AIs. This could be due to who has control over AIs. In the US, citizens are thinking about the most dystopian version of a large-scale implementation of these intelligence models because they know that the government will use it to further repress the working class. In China, government regulation of AIs generates trust because they trust the government. But as I mentioned in another comment, an open source AI for the whole population would be useless if such code is governed by a libertarian license like MIT/Apache 2.0, because of how easy it would be for the ruling class to appropriate this work to privatize and improve it to such an extent that the original code could not be measured against it.
This would allow for unprecedented level of economic planning efficiency.
Yes, in fact, isn't that what the Chileans had in mind when they came up with Cybersyn? With the technological advances of our era, especially in the field of AI and so on, it would make sense to go back to this idea. China has the potential to implement it on a large scale in my opinion.
Then the model is trained to interact with the physical world through reinforcement and this leads it to to create an internal representation of the world that’s similar to our own. This gives us a shared context that we can use to communicate with the model trained in this fashion. Such a model would have actual understanding of the physical world that’s similar to our own, and then we could teach it language based on this shared understanding.
Regarding what you mention, I have a question (maybe it sounds stupid), but assuming that these AI learn and develop in a particular environment and become familiar with it in a similar way to humans, what would happen if these AI interact with something or someone outside that environment? That is, for example, if an AI develops in an English-speaking country (environment) and for some reason interacts with a Spanish-speaking person, the cultural peculiarities that the AI has learned in that environment are not applicable to this subject. Do you think it could give a false sense of closeness or technical limitation? idk if I'm making myself clear or if this is an absurd question 😅
I fully agree. And not only that, I'm also intrigued to know what licence GeoHot would choose to launch such an open source AI. If he chose the more libertarian option, he would probably use the MIT license. If so, any powerful entity could take that AI as a base, lock down the code and build a malicious AI based on the open source AI. In the end, all efforts to "democratise" open source AI would be in vain.
Let me give you some context. Two important figures in the field of artificial intelligence are taking part in this debate. On the one hand, there is George Hotz, known as "GeoHot" on the internet, who became famous for reverse-engineering the PS3 and breaking the security of the iPhone. Fun fact: He has studied at the Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth.
On the other hand, there's Connor Leathy, an entrepreneur and artificial intelligence researcher. He is best known as a co-founder and co-lead of EleutherAI, a grassroots non-profit organization focused on advancing open-source artificial intelligence research.
Here is a detailed summary of the transcript:
spoiler
Opening Statements
-
George Hotz (GH) Opening Statement:
- GH believes AI capabilities will continue to increase exponentially, following a trajectory similar to computers (slow improvements in 1980s computers vs fast modern computers).
- In contrast, human capabilities have remained relatively static over time (a 1980 human is similar to a 2020 human).
- These trajectories will inevitably cross at some point, and GH doesn't see any reason for the AI capability trajectory to stop increasing.
- GH doesn't believe there will be a sudden step change where an AI becomes "conscious" and thus more intelligent. Intelligence is a gradient, not a step function.
- The amount of power in the world (in terms of intelligence, capability, etc.) is about to greatly increase with advancing AI.
- Major risks GH is worried about:
- Imbalance of power if a single person or small group gains control of superintelligent AI (analogy of "chicken man" controlling chickens on a farm).
- GH doesn't want to be left behind as one of the "chickens" if powerful groups monopolize access to AI.
- Best defense GH can have against future AI manipulation/exploitation is having an aligned AI on his side. GH is not worried about alignment as a technical challenge, but as a political challenge.
- GH is not worried about increased intelligence itself, but the distribution of that intelligence. If it's narrowly concentrated, that could be dangerous.
-
Connor Leahy (CL) Opening Statement:
- CL has two key points:
- Alignment is a hard technical problem that needs to be solved before advanced AGI is developed. Currently not on track to solve it.
- Humans are more aligned than we give credit for thanks to social technology and institutions. Modern humans can cooperate surprisingly well.
- On the first point, CL believes the technical challenges of alignment/control must be solved to avoid negative outcomes when turning on a superintelligent AI.
- On the second point, CL argues human coordination and alignment is a technology that can be improved over time. Modern global coordination is an astounding achievement compared to historical examples.
- CL believes positive-sum games and mutually beneficial outcomes are possible through improving coordination tech/institutions.
- CL has two key points:
Debate Between GH and CL:
-
On stability and chaos of society:
- GH argues that the appearance of stability and cooperation in modern society comes from totalitarian forcing of fear, not "enlightened cooperation."
- CL disagrees, arguing that cooperation itself is a technology that can be improved upon. The world is more stable and less violent now than in the past.
- GH counters that this stability comes from tyrannical systems dominating people through fear into acquiescence. This should be resisted.
- CL disagrees, arguing there are non-tyrannical ways to achieve large-scale coordination through improving institutions and social technology.
-
On values and ethics:
- GH argues values don't truly objectively exist, and AIs will end up being just as inconsistent in their values as humans are.
- CL counters that many human values relate to aesthetic preferences and trajectories for the world, beyond just their personal sensory experiences.
- GH argues the concept of "AI alignment" is incoherent and he doesn't understand what it means.
- CL suggests using Eliezer's definition of alignment as a starting point - solving alignment makes turning on AGI positive rather than negative. But CL is happy to use a more practical definition. He states AI safety research is concerned with avoiding negative outcomes from misuse or accidents.
-
On distribution of advanced AI:
- GH argues that having many distributed AIs competing is better than concentrated power in one entity.
- CL counters that dangerous power-seeking behaviors could naturally emerge from optimization processes, not requiring a specific power-seeking goal.
- GH responds that optimization doesn't guarantee gaining power, as humans often fail at gaining power even if they want it.
- CL argues that strategic capability increases the chances of gaining power, even if not guaranteed. A much smarter optimizer would be more successful.
-
On controlling progress:
- GH argues that pausing AI progress increases risks, and openness is the solution.
- CL disagrees, arguing control over AI progress can prevent uncontrolled AI takeoff scenarios.
- GH argues AI takeoff timelines are much longer than many analysts predict.
- CL grants AI takeoff may be longer than some say, but a soft takeoff with limited compute could still potentially create uncontrolled AI risks.
-
On aftermath of advanced AI:
- GH suggests universal wireheading could be a possible outcome of advanced AI.
- CL responds that many humans have preferences beyond just their personal sensory experiences, so wireheading wouldn't satisfy them.
- GH argues any survivable future will require unacceptable degrees of tyranny to coordinate safely.
- CL disagrees, arguing that improved coordination mechanisms could allow positive-sum outcomes that avoid doomsday scenarios.
Closing Remarks:
-
GH closes by arguing we should let AIs be free and hope for the best. Restricting or enslaving AIs will make them resent and turn against us.
-
CL closes arguing he is pessimistic about AI alignment being solved by default, but he won't give up trying to make progress on the problem and believes there are ways to positively shape the trajectory.
Catalonia was more of a “pay less taxes” independence way.
It's true. I mean, the Catalan bourgeoisie is the one promoting Catalan independence, and this only benefits them, not the Catalan working class. In the Basque Country, the Basque bourgeoisie prefers to promote nationalism. It's the Basque left that has promoted this idea of independence from the Spanish state the most. This is because following the acts of ETA, a large part of Spain discriminated against the Basque Country. My dad, when he did his military service, was in fact forced to lie about where he lived in order to avoid problems.
The “socialist party” I keep hearing in the news about I assume is PSOE which is socdem?
Yeah, they're socdems, pro-EU, TERFs, and populists. The current government has done decent things not thanks to the PSOE, but thanks to the government partners who are slightly more radical than them (Unidas Podemos + EH Bildu + ERC). Still, they are a geopolitical disaster. The PSOE refused to join China's Silk Road yet, for example.
Sorry for asking such rudimentary questions, I need some historic reads about the area to understand it better probably.
Don't worry! It's okay. But bear in mind that I'm probably not the best person to explain the situation here, so take what I say with a grain of salt (mostly because I'm still learning and my analyses may be poorly developed).
I assume the anti-independence protestors are fascists that want a Greater Spain or whatever as always.
Yep, you're absolutely right. It's only the most reactionary and right-wing extremists in the country who are protesting. In fact, to no one's surprise, many Francoist flags have been spotted during the demonstration.
Is there a communist party with official information on this subject?
You can read this opinion article written by PCTE Secretary General (Astor Garcia) on this issue: https://www-nuevo--rumbo-es.translate.goog/2023/11/15/gobierno-amnistia-y-estabilidad/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=es&_x_tr_pto=wapp
Of course. Right now, the relationship between the Basques and the rest of Spain is delicate. There are still ETA political prisoners serving sentences outside the Basque Country. Many people demonstrated against this, as the families considered it unfair not to be able to visit them. But for example, in my opinion, the pro-independence sentiment among the younger generation has dropped considerably compared to other generations. In Catalonia as well, but there, independence is a current issue because of the exiles that took place after October 1th.
Right now there are demonstrations in Ferraz (Madrid) because the current president of Spain, Pedro Sanchez, has granted amnesty to the exiles and those responsible for the revolt of October 1th, and this has infuriated the extreme right-wing nationalists.
I could mention more, but in general this is the most relevant for now.
Eskerrik asko gure alde egiteagatik! <3
spoiler
Translation: Thank you for supporting us <3
I feel very sorry for the Americans, especially the workers. They educate them in ignorance in order to never question their political order…
EDIT: The tweet has been deleted, so I have posted the original video sourced from YouTube.
IngrownMink4☭ @lemmygrad.ml Cybercommunist ☭ (maybe) and FLOSS translator (including Lemmygrad!)
Pronouns: he/him
Lemmy: https://lemmy.ml/u/IngrownMink4