|
|
|
|
|
|
by 1attice
1189 days ago
|
|
|
This puts in mind the earlier post on HN about modelling civ as either a one-shot or iterated prisoner's dilemma. You make the case that, for sufficiently high N, possessing GPT-N is a one-shot prisoner's dilemma. The only winning strategy is 'defect' --- which in this context, means chokepoint control. |
|
|
OpenAI -- its people, its buildings, its servers -- need nation-state level protection. This is an ICBM you could put on a thumb drive -- in fact, it's far worse than a loose nuke, because a nuclear weapon has a geographically limited range.
There need to be tanks and guards and, like, ten NSAs in a ring formation around this thing. At pain of x-risk, do not treat this like a consumer-facing product. This is not DoorDash.
This isn't a threat to national security. This isn't even a threat to the entire geopolitical order. This is a threat to the possibility of a geopolitical order.
OpenAI's assets -- its people, its servers, its buildings -- just became the most desirable resources on the planet. It behooves any actor with ambition to secure at least a copy, and ideally, capture at least some of the people who created it.
It doesn't matter if the threat actor is China, or Russia, extraterrestrials, or mermaids. You will find out who wants it shortly. But you know now -- you know from game theory, the body of mathematics that has kept the peace since the invention of atomic weapons -- what happens next.