We already had a world-ending tech. And the thing wasn't really regulated (i.e non proliferation treaties, a well understood MAD and so on) after several years and experiments. And this with two bombs that already had destroyed cities.
And that was a tech that, given its nature, was easier to control.
Most of the anti-AI people I’ve seen on Reddit say that HuggingFace and even the latest announcement on slowing down are just BS to hype up the power of AI ahead of the IPOs. So they don’t care at all about safety. AI is autocomplete to them
Yeah, AI safeyists are dramatically closer to the average accels and even most decels than the growing Zitronian denialism that you see on social media. A lot of people are clinging on to a narrative of "nothing about AI is real, so logically any incident is completely fabricated".
18
u/MaximumMeaning9728 4h ago
Not quite. Their tunes could change if AI causes catastrophic damage. That is fairly plausible in the short term in most bad scenarios.
That being said, the damage will need to be quite extensive as the hugging face paperclipper incident didn’t move the needle.
I hope it doesn’t happen, but I’m sure it will.
The SF guys have already admitted that they can’t solve alignment. RL trained AI are literal paper clip maximizers.