[canjobear]

Furthermore, the possibility that we create an AI that can outsmart humans in terms of filtering inappropriate content is even scarier. Do you really want a world with an AI censor of superhuman intelligence gatekeeping the means of content creation?

[AndrewKemendo]

If you squint and view the modern corporation as a proxy for "an AI censor of superhuman intelligence gatekeeping the means of content creation" - then that's been happening for a long while now.

Automatic review of content, NSFW filters, SPAM filters etc... have been bog standard since the earliest days of the internet.

I don't think anyone likes it. Some fight it and create their own spaces that allow certain types of content. Most people accept it though and move on with their lives

[vintermann]

I'm down with calling a corporation intelligent (as long as you don't call it a person). But automatic content review is regularly bypassed, they can't even keep very obvious spam off YouTube comments, such as comments copied from real users, posted with usernames like ClickMyChannelForXXX.

So if the corporation is an intelligent collective, then it's regularly outsmarted by other intelligent collectives determined to bypass it.

[AndrewKemendo]

Agreed, I think that's a good way to put it. That other collectives kind of "nip" at the larger ones and cause them to implement defenses.

[pverghese]

That's the government forcing corporations to do that

[AndrewKemendo]

Normally I don't respond but this is just false

SPAM filters on SMTP ports were implemented long long before any government mandated it - at the ISP level often

Further, the development DKIM and SPF, were incidental to any government requirement

Preemptively: The fact that the early internet was heavily government and institutionally focused, doesn't a government mandate make

[kelseyfrog]

We can look back further at the Hays code. That's just religion plain and simple. The feeling of, "we're sliding into a decadence which will lead to the downfall of our civilization" is a meme propagating this very sentiment. It's not a simple as just the government, but that does co-occur.

[angusturner]

Developing models that can predict if stuff is harmful ironically makes it easier for people to optimize for harm.

e.g. the one line of code in Stable Diffusion that predicts if stuff is NSFW, can be inverted to generate only NSFW stuff.

I tend to agree with OP that there is no technical solution to this problem.

[6510]

With some further refinement real harm could be done. Think of an infinite short video feed that is both irresistible and gradually modifies you.

[naillo]

Isn't this what infinite jest was entirely about

[tintor]

Solution is an arms race, by keeping your algorithmic improvements hidden.

[whywhywhywhy]

Isn’t that basically what OpenAI and Google tried to do and it lasted all of 3 months.

Problem with tech is once it’s known to be possible if you choose to try and monetize it by making it public as OpenAI and Google were planning to do then it’s only a matter of time before another smart team figure out how you’re doing it.

You can do the Manhattan Project in secret and in 500 years someone else might not realize it’s possible. But the second you do a test of that concept the sign you did that is detectable everywhere and the dots of what you did will connect in someone’s brain somewhere.

Can’t put the genie back in the bottle.