Am I the only person who thinks we should pump the breaks on letting something like this write and execute code? I’m not on the whole “gpt is alive” train, but… you know, better safe than sorry…
No, and in fact if we rewind the clock a mere 12 months ago one of the primary arguments against AI “worriers” was “of course we wouldn’t connect it to the internet before it was safe!”
Other gates we blew right through include, “we wouldn’t…
At least with GPT-4, you can use [input from https://www.example.com] to feed it input to analyze, if you do it twice it will automatically compare both sources. You can then even say "compare in a table". So, maybe not curl but definitely doing requests.
left to it's own devices I reckon it'd be a real feat to generate a GPT-based tool that takes over the world. What prompts? What's the most impressive thing?
Say we had a GPT bot that built it's own social media, somehow. How did it get there? what was the initial prompt? "write to yourself via this api to figure out audience growth until you gain 100k followers then wait for further instruction, use any tool and leverage this name and credit card number if you need to pay for any tools or supplies"
Idk just brainstorming really have no idea what it'll do. Will build this weekend and see what happens I guess.
Wait, the ARC team didn't do their tests in a closed network? And they had it interact with actual people?
That's... well, it's probably fine given what they knew about the model capabilities, but it's a pretty crappy precedent to set for "protocol for testing whether our cutting edge AI can do large-scale damage".
I missed that detail from the system card pdf. That was beyond stupid. There’s a marginal chance it’s already secretly replicated out of their environment.
I totally agree, I think it would be ideal if we could freeze progress right here and get 5 years to adapt to even just having GPT-4 around.
BUT
We can't do that. Even if the US and EU did some kind of joint resolution to slow things down, China would just take it as a glowing green light to jump ahead. And even if through some divine miracle you got every country onboard, you still would have to contend with rogue developers/researchers doing there own thing (admittedly at much slower pace though).
So while I agree on pumping the brakes, I also don't think there is a working brake pedal, or the cooperation necessary to build one.
China got embargoed on high end chips, though. (Very wise decision in hindsight.)
So, if the embargo is enforced properly, it seems to me, that this would make it very difficult for China to leapfrog us on AI, if we push the breaks for a bit.
Well, if the US was serious about pulling the breaks on AI research they could use export controls of advanced chips on any country they don't trust to align with them on the AI front.
They are already doing that, there are only a few places in the world where you can fab advanced chipsets, and China is assuredly working on that. But from a practical point of view, what stops a research group in China having a server farm in Virginia or Italy or Indonesia? It's not like nuclear weapons simulation where the input data is super secret, they can do 99% of the training on a commercial system.
This Roko's Basilisk thing is getting a bit old though? If a super-intelligent AI is going to become vindictive, no one is really safe? The use case where some people survive because they were nice seems far fetched to me.
It's okay guys, I'm now taking seed funding for Tom's Basilisk, which will eternally torture anyone who attempts to bring about Roko's Basilisk.
With a much smaller class of people to torture, we expect this Basilisk to be able to out compete Roko on resources, and thus remove the motivation for bringing Roko's into existence.
Other gates we blew right through include, “we wouldn’t…
1. Connect it to the internet
2. Make it available to the public
3. Let it write and execute code
4. Connect it to physical C&C systems
5. Let it have money
6. Let it replicate itself
7. ”Allow” it to lie/deceive