AI one-percenters seizing power forever is the real doomsday scenario, warns AI godfather

AI safety experts are worried that capitalists will be too eager to get AGI first and will discard caution (friendly AI principles) for mad science.

And I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords!

I've been thinking about how to do that. The code for most AI is pretty basic and uninteresting. It's mostly modifying the input for something usable. Companies could open source their entire code base without letting anything important out.

The dataset is the real problem. Say you want to classify fruit to check if it's ripe enough for harvesting. You'll need a whole lot of pictures of your preferred fruit where it's both ripe and not ripe. You'll want people who know the fruit to classify those images, and then you can feed it into a model. It's a lot of work, and needs to attract a bunch of people to volunteer their time. Largely the sort of people who haven't traditionally been a part of open source software.

Might be one of the key democratizing forces us plebs will have…I do suggest people try out some of the open solutions out there already just to have that skill in their back pockets (e.g. GPT4All).

Yep. As dangerous as that could be, it's better then centralizing it. There are already systems like GPT4all that come with good models that are slower then things like Chat GPT but work similarly well.

Longtime expert, prodigy, and one of the greatest minds in the field just isn't good enough

Unless they say Al instead of AI.

I think you've spotted the grift here. AI investment has faltered quickly, so a final pump before the dump. Get the suckers thinking it's a no-brainer and dump the shitty stock. Business insider caring for humanity lol

You're conflating polarized opinions of very different people and groups.

That being said your antagonism towards investors and wealthy companies is very sound as a foundation.

Hinton only gave his excessive worry after he left his job. There is no reason to suspect his motives.

Lecun is the opposite side and believes the danger is in companies hoarding the technology. He is why the open community has gained so much traction.

OpenAI are simultaneously being criticized for putting AI out for public use, as well a for not being open enough about the architecture, or allowing the public to actually have control of the state of AI developments. That being said they are leaning towards more authoritarian control from united governments and groups.

I'm mostly geared towards yann lecun and being more open despite the risks, because there is more risk and harm from hindering development of or privatizing the growth of AI technology.

The reality is that every single direction they try is heavily criticized because the general public has jumped onto a weird AI hate train.

See artists still complaining about adobe AI regardless of the training data, and hating on the open model community despite giving power to the people who don't want to join the adobe rent system.

I've heard some of them are calling for regulation, that favours them.

Sure AI is going to kill us all, but what about the Dow?!

Yeah, my own Dad calls me an "activist" now (in a deragotory manner). I never leave my house most days... But okay. I'm an activist because I think AI is a tangible threat to the working class. I've said only a few sentences to my Dad about it. But yeah... I guess I'm the problem for not finding some creative way to profit off LLM's yet.

That's great. Now try training that model on a 4080 and you'll see it'll take significantly longer. Try amassing the data needed for training on your home PC and see how much longer beyond that which you'll need. There's a reason the current race is down to just a few companies, it costs pennies to run queries on an existing model, millions to build and train that model in the first place.

Uhh what? You can totally run LLMs locally.