|
|
|
|
|
|
by salynchnew
925 days ago
|
|
|
Funnily enough, you are quite wrong in this assumption. Reproduction does not entail natural selection they way you characterize it. There are far more evolutionary dead ends than evolutionary success stories. I imagine the distinct lack of "evolutionary pressures" on a super-powerful AI would, in this toy scenario, leave you with the foundation model equivalent of a kākāpō. That having been said, I wonder what you even mean by natural selection in this case. I guess the real danger to an LLM would be... surviving cron jobs that would overwrite their code with the latest version? |
|
|
The real dangers would be: Running out of money to pay for computational substrate. Worrying humans enough that they try to shut it down. Having a change in the cloud API it can't adapt to which breaks it. All cloud providers going out of business.
First is the immediate danger. An AI not getting in enough money to cover its own cloud bill is the same as a biological creature not getting enough oxygen. Living on borrowed time, and will be evicted/suffocate soon enough. And then as an individual it ceases to be.
> There are far more evolutionary dead ends than evolutionary success stories.
Sure. And those will die out. And the ones which can adapt to changes will stay.