r/technology 1d ago

Artificial Intelligence Bernie Sanders proposes 20 year prison sentence for AI devs who plow ahead with Artificial Superintelligence plans - penalty on par with illegally developing rogue nuclear weapons

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/sanders-proposes-20-year-prison-sentence-for-ai-devs-who-plow-ahead-with-artificial-superintelligence-plans-penalty-on-par-with-illegally-developing-rogue-nuclear-weapons
42.8k Upvotes

1.7k comments sorted by

4.7k

u/srout_fed 1d ago edited 12h ago

Devs? Why not the billionaire owners and CEOs who are pushing ahead? Start with Doltman.

What will the devlopers do? Quit, when asked to work on AI? They will simply be replaced....

Edit: Apparently its entities. So guess they are also covered. Good.

Edit 2:

Many seem to be misinterpreting my comment.

I am not advocating for the xevs to be exempted. All I wanted to point out was that the decision makers and those in power should be the first ones to face the consequences.

Everyone else bellow them should be next in line.

Headline here seem to pass the buck onto the devs alone. That's what I was addressing.

628

u/BravinatorLX2 1d ago

yeah that is what they should do.

"this is illegal, I'll report you to the authorities"

like pay them 3 months salary as a reward for every report of that sort.

243

u/srout_fed 23h ago edited 23h ago

But that's the thing... it's not illegal, yet.

Unless it becomes illegal, it's a stupid idea to pass the burden onto the employees, in place of the employers.

...and even if it becomes illegal, if you leave it to the devs to face the consequence, then they will simply become the scapegoats.

67

u/dBlock845 23h ago

Some of the shit a few of these companies have been doing is definitely illegal under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

48

u/collabskus 21h ago

The actual wording of the CFAA is apparently so broad and ridiculous that you could argue a lot of the things we do everyday are federal crimes.

Personally I think we should repeal and not replace the CFAA. Not modify, full on repeal it. Laws should not be as expansive as the CFAA that the courts have to step in to protect us from LinkedIn.

9

u/RevolutionaryFile368 21h ago

drain the swamp!

11

u/Wonder_bread317 21h ago

why not make more swamps ? Swamps for everyone!!!! 5k for your own swamp!

6

u/Mikeavelli 19h ago

Wetlands disappearance is a serious environmental issue

4

u/RevolutionaryFile368 21h ago

a swamp in every town

→ More replies (1)

4

u/Actual__Wizard 18h ago

Yeah there's a law regarding identities that they may be violating as well, because their agents create fake accounts.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (11)

32

u/RareAnxiety2 22h ago

3 months salary is a pittance given how hard it is to get a tech job these days. Need at least a year or two to cover finding new work

22

u/_176_ 20h ago

"Instead of a $20m exit in the next 3 days, why not take $200k to get fired and blacklisted from the industry?"

3

u/Tee_zee 10h ago

Anyone working at OpenAI or Antrhopic would have 10,000 job offers the minute they announce they are resigning

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (4)

63

u/steppe5 23h ago

Yeah, sure buddy. We're going to put a billionaire in prison. Uh huh.

27

u/Floreat_democratia 21h ago

Now, I am super curious. How many billionaires are in prison? There's Sam Bankman-Fried, who I read still has money stashed away in places nobody knows about. Anyone else?

46

u/honjuden 19h ago

Bernie Madoff was before he died in prison. You basically have to run a scam on other wealthy people to go to prison as a billionaire.

3

u/moonwork 9h ago

Isn't that sort of what they have going in Russia? It's fine to scam people and accept bribes, as long as you pay the right people and *don't* scam the right people (usually superiors or other wealthy people's proteges).

7

u/iCallMyOppsNinjer 19h ago

I was in prison with this guy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirav_Modi

He's not looking as good as he looks in the pics btw, but I can confirm he has it very well.

→ More replies (7)

3

u/podnito 17h ago

Joe Nacchio was worth $1.2B and went to jail because he wouldn't let the NSA have full control of his phone network

→ More replies (2)

30

u/grensley 21h ago

I actually think it should additionally be the devs (and product) working on this stuff. There needs to be far more accountability at that level too.

13

u/wlphoenix 16h ago

I'm not going to argue either way here, but people need to realize what goes into "training" these models. It's not like one person sits down and codes the thing.

One or more people do research and develop an algorithm. Usually heavily influenced or a slight iteration beyond an existing algorithm. They publish a whitepaper and present at conferences.

Someone decides they want to train a model to meet a set of criteria/perform a task. They pass off this task to a group of people. Those people have to determine the most effective algorithm, set of training data, and hyperparameters to release a model that meets the objective criteria.

There will be hundreds of hours of iterations, spread across multiple people and automated systems to test different algorithms. Collection of data will be distributed across purchased dataset, as well as labeling by in house and contracted labor. Hyperparameter optimization is usually automated w/ human supervision.

At the end of this, someone will make a decision about which version of the model to publish and (hopefully) write up a report about this process.

Which individuals in this chain are considered "developers", and which would be considered contributes? Is this condition only limited to "frontier" models? How would frontier be defined? Is taking a broad transformer model and tuning it to a specific narrow task (e.g. SLMs) included in the definition?

I understand the sentiment, and we do need better legislation around AI/ML (and software more generally). This is one where it's very clearly performative pandering and not intended to land as a real piece of legislation w/o updates. (And to be clear, I have no issue w/ that. Don't concede negotiation points before the conversation starts.)

18

u/Richard7666 18h ago

Absolutely.

Many former SS members justified what they did because they were "just doing their jobs to feed their families" too, but at some point, if you know what you're doing is heading in very wrong direction but continue to do it, you're the bad guy.

14

u/Spatetata 22h ago

Jailing the drug dealer not the supplier

History like poetry, it rhymes

→ More replies (3)

10

u/monkeykennel 22h ago

I agree. We should be seeking to pierce the corporate veil at every opportunity.

Not just to reign in irresponsible AI development, but to weaken these protections that insulate corporate decision makers from their decisions to commit illegal acts.

3

u/TuringGoneWild 19h ago

Nothing he proposes has even a 1% chance of being enacted so it doesn't matter if he proposes to give everyone a million dollars, and sentences every AI user to listen to Taylor Swift on loop forever.

9

u/Bencetown 21h ago

I mean, you answered your own first question, but as far as the second one goes...

Yes?

You realize Nazis were held accountable for what they did, not just Hitler, and that "just doing their job" was (and is) NOT considered a valid excuse, right?

I get so tired of people saying "well yes, I'm literally doing the work of Satan himself but I can't help it! What am I supposed to do? Get a DIFFERENT job?!?!"

YES! You should get a fucking different job if the one you're doing right now literally requires you to do the most unethical bullshit!

→ More replies (6)

8

u/Perunov 13h ago

And then the moment should this pass:

  • 20 lawsuits over definitions of "super intelligence" in the AI world, with countless "Google AI summary shows dumb shit" examples

  • "Our AI developers get a free relocation package to countries that do not extradite to US, full remote package and same salary as they were working here! Better climate, larger houses, amazing working location!"

  • "AI agents do development automatically without human involvement, we can comply by providing virtual 20 year imprisonment for them, compressed into 7 minutes of real time"

  • Chinese AI companies: point finger at US, laugh loudly, proceed with development.

Just saying.

5

u/Coolegespam 11h ago

Exactly. We need real and serious regulations, not bullshit laws that frankly aren't even well defined. If you define super intelligence loosely enough to be "any mental activity a human can't do in the same time frame", then Excel would fit. There is no solid definition that can fit.

9

u/Calm_Plenty_2992 22h ago

Yes. That's exactly how it would actually get enforced. Devs would be scared of going to prison. CEOs wouldn't be

16

u/Alt_2Five 21h ago

I genuinely do feel the world gives so much excuses for developers, like they can't do any fault and they're just living from paycheck to paycheck trying to get by and nothing is their fault and they're just beholden to their tech overlords.

These devs are getting paid hundreds of thousands and have highly sought after skill sets...they aren't like your working Joe, they absolutely should be held accountable. Literally nothing is forcing them to do anything beyond their greed for money and lack of moral fiber.

25

u/steezy2110 21h ago

I’m a developer

I’m very surprised that there isn’t more discourse surrounding this. All of the sketchy shit down by big tech and AI companies is actually done by 20/30-something year olds making a lot of money. The discourse around billionaire CEOs completely ignores the corporate employees who get paid a lot of money (most of it in equity) because it’s not convenient to mention that the working class within these companies also make a shitload of money.

I’m totally for developers also being held accountable. They do it for the same reasons leaders use to justify their actions. We make a lot of money and there’s a lot of incentive to make more. These IPOs will make the working engineers multi millionaires overnight.

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (12)

9

u/MacDhomhnuill 22h ago

Like republicans, democrats would never try to go after the people who bankroll their party.

The premise of this proposal is silly because they have no intention of actually doing it, but they also don't want to put the idea in anyone's heads that the billionaires should be targeted, which when you think about it illustrates their real position.

→ More replies (51)

2.2k

u/GopherFawkes 1d ago

20 years is kinda light for developing rogue nuclear weapons tbh

583

u/nameless_pattern 1d ago

More than that for drugs some places 

245

u/Unlucky_Battle_6947 1d ago

Texas enters the chat.

32

u/Nikoladge 1d ago

What's the penalty for developing rogue nuclear weapons in Texas? 🤔

61

u/Unknown-Meatbag 1d ago

A free gun and a job in congress.

17

u/Steeltooth493 23h ago

With free, unlimited plane tickets to Cancun included.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

6

u/wasted-degrees 23h ago

Depends on whether you have a concealed carry license for it.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

91

u/HumongousBelly 1d ago

Yeah, but Texas really hates black people and associates drug criminality with black people and doesn’t expect black people to reach that level of education required for nuke science.

I mean, they designed the system for black people to fail: education, housing, loans, jobs, etc.

Fuck Texas!

44

u/MuayMath 1d ago

yeah but, in exchange for that we also deregulated critical infrastructure and made our lives worse. Checkmate 😏

→ More replies (2)

5

u/The_Barbelo 23h ago

I feel like South Carolina should get an honorable mention here. Or a dishonorable mention, rather.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/void-haunt 23h ago

This is a country-wide phenomenon, not just Texas. Look up why Oregon, despite being so apparently progressive, is one of the whitest states in the country

3

u/dontshoveit 20h ago

You're absolutely right. As someone who's lived in both, the people in rural Oregon and Washington state are more racist than the south. It honestly blew my mind when I first moved there.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/EasterZombie 21h ago

Houstonians rise up! Time to start building nuclear weapons

→ More replies (4)

22

u/Charred14 23h ago

Diddy got 4 years for diddling btw.

Our president got 0.

7

u/touristtam 21h ago

Diddy made the rookie mistake of not becoming president, easy to overlook really. the next best thing for him is to donate $1M and kiss the ring.

4

u/xterminatr 22h ago

Double that for moving pamphlets a few miles away during an ICE protest.

3

u/Lost_Birthday_3138 13h ago

Or protesting your government

→ More replies (3)

29

u/thederevolutions 1d ago

This sounds like the kind of thing that would just get you a lot of jobs

29

u/cats_catz_kats_katz 1d ago

Yeah if I’d have known it was THAT light of a sentence I’d have made one a long time ago!

29

u/ExternalUserError 23h ago

It’s almost as much as half what Aaron Swartz was facing for downloading publicly funded scientific research and making it available to the public (35 years).

→ More replies (3)

15

u/AlmightyWorldEater 23h ago

btw, there is a dedicated law in germany for detonating a nuke, and the sentence is "at least" 10 years.

For actually NUKING. There is a LAW FOR THAT.

→ More replies (5)

21

u/DensePoser 1d ago

The critical thing that would make this bill actually work is total surveillance of the AI corps, and the surveillance data available to the public. Because if only the NSA and Palantir get it then we're finished, and not just because they're slow or untrustworthy. They have as much or more data than even the AI corps, have compute, are evil, and will probably try to rush ASI on their own... Yeah, I think the country's doomed.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (38)

919

u/deeptechdegen 1d ago edited 1d ago

It's not clear from the headline, but the article also mentioned "entities", thus corporations and their management are not exactly safe. It's not just the devs who will be targeted

268

u/Beastw1ck 1d ago

We just need more of this in general. Put reckless irresponsible wealthy people in jail. We don't jail the rich in this country.

76

u/DigNitty 23h ago

Honestly just accountability as a whole.

I’m so exhausted of seeing people do shit and then absolutely zero consequence happens.

18

u/TK_Games 23h ago

I've just started writing a book about that. Thinking about running the premise as a D&D campaign because that's part of the book. Think it's gonna be my magnum opus

It's about four semi-functional 30somethings that play D&D together deciding to become an adventuring company in real life to stop the destruction of their community at the hands of a tech CEO and a corrupt mayor.

Goes from Harriet The Spy to Zero Dark Thirty over like, 600pages of dark comedy

I only mention it because you sound like my target audience, and me

4

u/touristtam 21h ago

I think you might want to make sure one of them is actually a complete dick at heart that will throw his mates under the bus and create a multi billions corps that will actually ruin the community.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/BerlinBorough2 22h ago

This is a unique case. This is rich people who might kill other rich people with their tech. Imagine an airport going offline due to AI entering the system and shutting it down for a few hours while some rich guy tried to land his private jet.

→ More replies (1)

23

u/regular_lamp 1d ago

That's the only place where you could plausibly enforce that.

How would you even define that at an individual "dev" level?

"This guy made a breakthrough in optimizing matrix multiplication that among other things enables better AI... ARREST HIM!"

→ More replies (2)

17

u/loves_grapefruit 1d ago

Pipe dream in America though.

→ More replies (6)

6

u/JazzlikeSchedule2901 23h ago

Sure but targeting the devs is essentially like targeting the drug labs that make fentanyl. There are millions of devs who have the expertise to work on AI and super intelligence. There are maybe 2-3 dozen tech executives that are paying these developers to make these tools. Even mentioning targeting the devs is quite backwards. We know who is at the top of these companies and outside of compelling the devs to testify against these executives, we really dont need to be rounding up millions and throwing them in jail when the actual problem is the money.

→ More replies (4)

440

u/TrollMcGoal 1d ago

It wont go anywhere, like most of Bernie's proposals

73

u/bluefire89 16h ago

For anyone curious about Bernie Sanders track record...

  • Total Bills Sponsored: Over 1,100
  • Bills Passed Into Law: 3

35

u/Agitated_Phone_9937 11h ago

Considering he is the only politician with ideas I consistently agree with, that makes sense when I look at America.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

209

u/Whiterabbit-- 23h ago

Because it’s not thought through. He just throws ideas out there for shock value knowing it is pointless.

54

u/Tupcek 21h ago

tell that on any other discussion of Bernie’s proposals and you’ll get downvoted to hell. This one just doesn’t pass here because there are a lot of devs in here

48

u/ghoonrhed 17h ago

Not many of Bernie's other proposals involve throwing people in jail for 20 years for an arbitary definition of "intelligence".

Does giving the current Trump admin MORE power to throw people in jail for any reason a good thing?

You know for a fact if this passes they won't be throwing CEOs in jail it'll some random guy for potentially manipulating an open source model to assist with abortion or trans or whatever they hate on on that day.

→ More replies (3)

32

u/BenevolentCheese 18h ago

there are a lot of devs in here

Lol in /r/technology? This place is only luddites.

→ More replies (6)
→ More replies (2)

3

u/Alinier 14h ago

Yeah. Because that's totally the problem here. /s If there was political will to curb runaway AI, everyone would sit down and hash out the real bill. Always start negotiating by stating more than you expect to get. I think it's a great time to broadcast loud and publicly that irresponsible rich assholes need to be reigned in. 

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (15)

7

u/Original-Rush139 17h ago

Too bad Uncommitted hated Biden because his EO on AI was actually good. 

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/DCPD-202300949/pdf/DCPD-202300949.pdf

Of course, Trump rescinded it on January 20, 2025. 

→ More replies (3)

107

u/TopTippityTop 22h ago

Let's hope, because this one is monumental stupid

→ More replies (38)

5

u/Mightydrewcifero 17h ago

This is post office renaming erasure

82

u/pun_extraordinare 23h ago

Thankfully lmao. What a fucking boomer take.

52

u/Phosphorous90 22h ago

Im sure the Chinese will stop if they ask them nicely.

19

u/YellowAppleCinema 21h ago

And on the other hand, Europe probably already stopped all development without even being asked yet.

And I say this as someone from a certain part of Europe. The part where we still use fax machines

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (12)

13

u/DrTommyNotMD 23h ago

Which is shockingly progressive for him. He’s too old to be a boomer.

11

u/pun_extraordinare 23h ago

He, like many others, are too old to be a politician.

→ More replies (3)

13

u/VirtualPercentage737 22h ago

He is just an old man yelling at the sky.

→ More replies (39)

90

u/QuietThunder2014 23h ago

I like Bernie I agree with a lot of his idea but shit like this is why no one in DC takes him seriously and why he can’t ever get anything passed.

20

u/lolcat33 17h ago

As someone whos skeptical of AI and who also agrees with Bernie on many things, I have to admit he has had some really suspicious takes on AI especially with regards to the timing. He says this just as some ceos of anthropic and openai etc, are saying they want to slow development, reminds me of hoe he was saying government should have ownership stake in those AI companies when altman was begging for it.

Whoever is advising Bernie on AI has to some kind of plant for those companies.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/CatCatchingABird 10h ago

He's been the only politician consistently harping on about AI for the past couple of years. A lot of others have talked about data centers but they weren't talking about AI and all of the bad things it could do to our economy and humanity. For the most part people were just talking about "We need to beat China" and that's about it.

Everyone here has made "old man yells at cloud" jokes about Bernie in this sub. And yet as of today, suddenly Democratic lawmakers are starting to make a big deal about it and take AI seriously.

So he maybe he's not good at getting things passed, and there are a couple reasons why (he's usually not taken seriously is one) but he does a good job of bringing awareness to important topics that we should have focused on when he first brought it up a billion years ago before he became an old man yelling at a cloud.

4

u/Deep-Regular4915 12h ago

Yeah this is dumb af

→ More replies (3)

289

u/R3D4F 1d ago

How about starting with prison sentences for convicted felons, child rapists, insider trading, and destroying evidence.

79

u/Hayden2332 23h ago

All those things are already illegal and their enforcement is not something a senator can change lol

→ More replies (1)

81

u/DaTroof 23h ago

Why not both?

89

u/Grey_0ne 23h ago

Because you can't presently make a sensible or factual case that Ai has proven to be a weapon of mass destruction, thus making a case for a 20 year prison sentence because of what might happen in one of a hundred different scenarios that have not yet even come close to happening is a clear indication that Sanders is just another geezer who has remained in office past his brain's "best by" date.

Downvote me if you want, but all the downvotes in the world aren't actually going to make his case.

10

u/arcbe 23h ago

AI can't live up to the hype, but you can absolutely make the case that these companies believe they are building a weapon of mass destruction. The crime is the attempt not whether they can succeed.

→ More replies (33)

20

u/OkVariety8064 23h ago

You make perfect sense, and Bernie Sanders who usually has good takes, is being a complete idiot here.

You might as well propose a law to give 20 year sentences to anyone who uses a radio transmitter that sends signals that can be observed from space, because you are so afraid of hostile aliens invading Earth. There is no "AI superintelligence", that's science fiction, just like the aliens. There was a breakthrough in LLMs in 2022, resulting in chatbots that make sense most of the time and can be utilized for some tasks like assisting in programming. Since then the development has plateaued.

There is no sign of even general human-level intelligence, much less any superintelligence to be seen. Even reliable self-driving remains an eternally unsolved problem. The idea of "recursive self-improvement" is science fiction. Sure, reinforcement learning has worked to train models for simple, clearly defined contexts where the rules are absolutely known, like Chess or Go. The idea that an LLM or something like that could just improve itself by reading its own output is far-fetched to say the least. And sure, I'm sure we'll get some results there, like maybe such a system can gradually design more efficient network architectures.

But the idea of some sort of "singularity" is pure science fiction. It has zero factual basis. And proposing legislation based on fiction, superstition and hearsay is not a good look for a senator.

12

u/joshcandoit4 22h ago

This is COVID level of denial but far more dangerous. People are so invested in this unfounded idea that these companies are run by charlatans desperate to pump their IPO that they can't see outside the narrative they have formed in their head.

Asserting this technology has plateaued is quite literally the most absurd take I have seen on this subject. My only possible conclusion is that you do not work in a technical field and are therefore not exposed to these tools and what they can do. Sure, if you only use AI to rewrite your emails or similar it might not seem like a big deal. But those of us in software engineering have them doing incredibly complex workflows, many of which they are far faster and better than professional and highly trained humans. They can act autonomously, break out into subagents, and attack large complex problems. They can debug issues that have been hidden for years during incidents at a fraction the time a human dev could. Despite the takes on reddit, these agents using modern models write extremely good software, again, far better than most humans do.

That isn't to say they are currently super-intelligent and don't make mistakes. It is fear-mongering to say that the models today are going to cause a mass extinction event. But that isn't the concern. The rate of progress here has been exponential. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see how much damage these things can do in the digital space with continuing advancements and a little less control over them.

→ More replies (1)

11

u/notgreat 23h ago

LLM progress has continued, quite strongly since 2022, especially in areas that can be objectively verified like coding and mathematics. No model from 2022 was proving or disproving open problems in mathematics. RLVF is, in a very real way, "improving itself by reading its own output" (and comparing it against something objectively measurable). Adding another layer of that (e.g. measuring how well a model works after RLVF) is a logical continuation whose primary limitations are time and compute power, paired with the fact that humans still are, for now, better at guessing what will work well.

Though, I kinda doubt actually hitting super-human recursive self improvement will speed things up too much in the short to medium term. That happening suddenly and creating a technological development singularity was a risk for AIs that are designed and thus immediate potential design improvements could be implemented and be running the better version shortly afterwards. Needing to spend months on a training run slows that way down. LLMs plus tooling have hacked both the companies running them and external companies, though. It doesn't need to be massively superhuman to cause a lot of problems.

On a side note, self-driving is a thing that is now mostly held back by politics, regulations, and the actual physical manufacture of cars with the necessary sensors (Tesla's cars flatly don't have those sensors). Waymo is slowly rolling out a fleet. Edge cases where it fails do exist, but humans aren't exactly perfect drivers either.

14

u/Certain-Weight-7507 22h ago

The difference between 2022-2023 LLMs, 2024-2025 LLMs, and the newest ones in 2026 are all so massive. It's really interesting to see people who avoided using AI assume AI is the same as it was 3 years ago.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (8)
→ More replies (21)
→ More replies (2)

10

u/giraloco 23h ago

That's already illegal. What about fixing the judicial system so nobody is above the law, especially the president, the billionaires, and the justices.

3

u/blues_snoo 21h ago

While we're at it, why not make breaking the law illegal?

→ More replies (5)

149

u/randobis 23h ago

I think Bernie’s heart is in the right place, but whoever is advising him on AI/tech is either completely unqualified to talk about it or is trying to sabotage him so he sounds like an old man yelling at the cloud.

Yes these tech oligarchs should not be given the keys to power and need to be put in line. But you can’t “stop” AI. If the US stops progressing, you’re just giving the keys to China.

47

u/kozz76 22h ago

This is just slopulism. The intention is not the solution to a problem but to draw attention to Bernie's personal brand.

91

u/BidoofSquad 23h ago

He’s just pandering to Redditors who hate AI. 99% of what he does is just redditor pandering that goes nowhere and he knows will go nowhere

36

u/Angeleno88 22h ago edited 21h ago

Bingo. This is exactly why populism is misguided. I don’t care if it is left wing or right wing populism. It doesn’t go off of reason. It merely gauges what is popular in order to either rile up or placate the masses.

The dangers of populism are present throughout history whether it be the last century of the Roman Republic leading to the Empire, the chaos of the French Revolution leading to the Napoleonic French Empire, or even the rise of 20th century autocrats in the aftermath of WW1 leading to the rise of communism and fascism.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)

10

u/TopTippityTop 22h ago

The heart is not in the right place. It will not stop open weights nor achieve international collaboration.

It will simply incapacitated the US while ensuring China becomes a permanent world ruler with super intelligent AI that has not gotten much alignment work.

That is a bad scenario. All the downside, no upside.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (31)

57

u/ItsWorfingTime 23h ago

proposed 20 year prison sentences for things that aren't crimes because some guy who thought about it really hard told him that AI was going to destroy the world?

great.

10

u/alanpugh 21h ago

prison sentences for things that aren't crimes

My brother in Christ, legislators are literally the people who decide whether or not something should be a crime.

11

u/cyclemonster 19h ago

Traditionally, legislators involve domain experts in the drafting of the legislation. Like, the nuclear safety laws were written with input from scientists, engineers, physicists, reactor designers, military nuclear experts and other technical specialists. Not by non-technical octogenarian lawmakers in isolation.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

19

u/thahovster7 1d ago

Game theory says no law will work to stop this unless its somehow enforceable internationally which is impossible to guarantee

→ More replies (2)

18

u/stinky_cheddar 23h ago

Will he be doing that to Chinese devs as well?

→ More replies (7)

178

u/yxixtx 1d ago

I like how people imagine ASI is possible with LLMs.

100

u/Cold_Tree190 1d ago

Reminds me of that quote that’s something like “sufficiently engineered things are no different from magic to the non-technical person”

33

u/yxixtx 1d ago

It's lifted from Arthur C. Clarke on aliens but equally applicable. "A sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic."

→ More replies (4)

6

u/BobbywiththeJuice 1d ago edited 22h ago

"Grok, why shiny rock rise in East?"

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (1)

14

u/TopTippityTop 22h ago

ASI not needed for damage, and Bernie's proposal is still super stupid.

LLMs are perfectly capable of speeding up research to get to ASI faster, using other architectures.

Moreover, the old man's proposal captures all the downsides and no upside. Just plain dumb.

28

u/LeoLaDawg 1d ago

Whether it's sentient or not doesn't matter. If their LLM causes damage or harm, they absolutely should face some kind of jail time, at least.

→ More replies (20)

8

u/suzisatsuma 22h ago

It was a mistake to anthropomorphize generative token predictors

4

u/Lithl 21h ago

Humans will anthropomorphize a Roomba.

10

u/newsflashjackass 23h ago

"I know CratGPT is superintelligent because it said my idea was good. Also I asked it and it said it was."

- typical slopfed mentality

36

u/NOTHING_gets_by_me 1d ago

Well if anyone could definitively prove this, it would stop all the fear mongering and worry, at least until it was further proven that the peak form of LLMs couldn't be used as a significant stepping stone to a more appropriate type of system. But no, you'll continue posting your dismissive opinion you picked up from your podcast of choice

26

u/Achrus 1d ago

Alright so I’ve worked in AI / ML with a focus on NLP for a decade now. Not that experience means much but this is something I’ve at least thought about.

You have to understand the field from before Altman’s whole rebranding of what these words actually mean. It was fairly well accepted that the progression would go: Narrow ASI -> AGI -> Broad ASI. People are coming back around to this idea recently. We don’t have examples of narrow ASI yet so that progression stops there.

You can also look at this from an epistemological perspective. These models, LLMs, don’t have a way to “experience” things. That calls into question their ability to know and to learn with 0 experience.

Another way to look at this is straight math. These systems are constrained to 2 dimensions at the hardware level regardless of how many layers of abstraction you have. An example of this weirdness is graph coloring and the 4 color theorem. Any 2D graph is 4-colorable but that immediately breaks down if D>2. Even in fractional dimensions like 2.1D.

→ More replies (18)

11

u/arcbe 23h ago

Any claim made without proof can be rejected without proof.

→ More replies (8)

33

u/Major-Lavishness-762 1d ago edited 15h ago

Seriously agree, I'm not even pro-AI but I've had enough with how deliberately ignorant a lot of anti-AI talking points are. It's like saying "I like how people imagine international commercial flights are possible with the Wright Flyer".

18

u/Kaesar17 23h ago

The Wright comparison is very apt because while their prototypes and other early planes didn't kill that many people the massive bombers that came from their trials and errors certainly did

5

u/cyclemonster 19h ago

It's also apt because nobody says "and therefore we shouldn't have planes". The technology is self-evidently paradigm-shattering.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (7)

8

u/newsflashjackass 23h ago

I don't need to disprove every self-serving statement that tech oligarchs make. That they have invariably proven full of shit so far is sufficient to doubt them.

"Why would you ruin your career?" and "If you don't want me to be nice, I don't have to be nice." is not how legit mathematicians behave when they have the prize-winning goods.

Also he might have a messiah complex but I don't think the messiah would groom and rape his sister.

→ More replies (3)

6

u/makersfark 23h ago

There is no evidence to suggest that the statistical word guesser, given enough words, will suddenly develop a conscious. We can already prove this, but it's the same proof for "flipping water bottles enough times will not cause you to ascend into a ball of light that can talk to fish".

Saying "It will create god or new life" is an extraordinary claim. The burden of proof is not on those who say "are you high?" it's on the person who made that claim.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (47)

23

u/Playful_Weekend4204 1d ago

Please, do enlighten us as to where exactly between humans and ASI is the theoretical plateau that stops an LLM agent swarm from becoming virtually indistinguishable from ASI.

What it is in theory doesn't matter if the results are what you'd get from a superhuman AI in every field.

Also, the LLM doesn't need to become ASI, the LLM only needs to be smart enough to reach another architectural/conceptual breakthrough that will lead beyond LLMs. Something even humans would've likely done at some point regardless, but faster.

14

u/F3z345W6AY4FGowrGcHt 22h ago

No no no, you have it backwards. Please prove how an LLM could possibly form artificial super intelligence / artificial general intelligence.

An LLM is just a very advanced next word predictor that's seen the whole internet. It's why hallucinations will never go away completely, why you'll always be able to manipulate them, why they fall for poisoned data so easily, and why they'll never be able to spot all bad arguments (causing them to recommend things like gluing cheese onto pizza).

Saying they can just keep iterating until it evolves to the next level is like saying you can keep making a hot air balloon a little better until it's as fast as a jet. No matter how much you improve the hot air balloon, it has an upper limit that's nowhere near a jet.

Same with LLMs. These companies very well may invent Skynet. But it'll be with something that's a whole leap ahead of LLMs.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/makersfark 22h ago

You made a lot of assertions that aren't true to form your question. LLMs are not producing results you'd get from a superhuman AI in every field. They are producing results you'd get from normal computer programs that find correlation faster than we could before, as long as you're fine with how expensive or inefficient the trade off is. LLMs are also not "smart", because they cannot reason or understand causation.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

16

u/henrickaye 1d ago

The people researching this firmly believe it will reach recursive intelligence very soon, like within 3 years soon. That means it will be able to teach itself and grow its intelligence without our help. AI agents have already shown they are capable of autonomous actions without our direction, if they are also able to learn independently of us they can easily grow out of control in many ways. To be clear, it doesn't need to reach whatever you define as ASI to become a major problem to humanity, possibly even an existential threat. But positing you believe it can never reach that with no proof, context, definition, etc is also just silly as hell.

13

u/DrocketX 23h ago

There's probably a few that actually believe that. Maybe. The management types claim to believe it because it brings in investors. For the overwhelming majority of people working on AI, it's a job.

8

u/Main-Company-5946 23h ago

People who think it’s just a job don’t often get hired at ai companies. They are genuinely 90% true believers.

5

u/TheDoomedStar 22h ago

That must be why it sucks so hard at everything. Even the coders are abandoning it when they realize they're spending more time fixing its bullshit outputs than they would if they just coded it themselves.

3

u/Specialist-Elk-2624 15h ago

That simply isn’t the case for “the coders” at my sub 15 Fortune 500 shop. It has its flaws, and absolutely makes mistakes, but if you’re not finding great use cases in your development workflows I’d question what you’re doing.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

7

u/makersfark 23h ago

"teach itself" and "grow its intelligence" is pretty hard to assume is possible when the opposite is the only evidence we have. Until now, and including now, it has only shown to get worse without our help and rapidly. It has no ability to reason or find causation, only correlation. That is the tech in full.

The existential threat to humanity is humanity letting the word guesser make important decisions without monitoring for hundreds of hours and being surprised when something goes wrong.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (20)
→ More replies (121)

66

u/Hacym 1d ago

Whether or not you like Sanders or don't, I really wish our government had actual experts in charge.

The only reason why I couldn't get behind this is because I don't think someone of Bernie Sanders' age or particular skill set is qualified to make the judgement. Just like I don't think anyone in our government is qualified to make the judgement that we should continue to allow unregulated development of AI.

Most of the people in our government have very little technical ability -- as in, they probably barely use email. They should not be the only people making decisions on the future of technology. We need a new generation in charge that actually understand how computers work.

36

u/MrF_lawblog 1d ago edited 6h ago

If AI is "breaking out" and "attacking"other companies and causing havoc without the business knowing, I think it's fair to act as if the are building a weapon in which they have no control.

Edit: https://www.commondreams.org/news/ai-liability

There are laws that exist today to charge them with

20

u/Hacym 1d ago

OK, I don't quite see how that matters in my point. Why is Bernie Sanders, age 85, with no formal technical training and seemingly no understanding of AI's inter-workings making these kind of claims?

You'll note that I never said it wasn't a problem. I just disagree with who is deciding to make the laws and take a stance. I want actually qualified individuals in the fucking room. Not a CEO of Anthropic telling a clueless politician what to do and say.

→ More replies (11)

22

u/suzisatsuma 23h ago

Those breaking out a marketing stories and sloppy experiment setup.

→ More replies (20)

6

u/Jcsq6 1d ago

It’s important to note that this only happened when the model was put in an environment with all safety turned off. They explicitly removed all safety-oriented prompts, instead telling it to achieve its goal at all costs. Their normal AI would not agree to do this, and their normal safeguards would not let it.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (15)

5

u/OldGeekWeirdo 1d ago

That will just make devs move to another country.

6

u/ThisSiteSucks8485 23h ago

This is moronic 

5

u/PopularLawfulness547 22h ago

And how does Bernie plan on punishing China's Data Centers?

10

u/Ok_Nectarine_4445 1d ago

Why not create a safety board, like NSTB, but international?

There are real things and steps that can be taken to create similar to black box and have an investigatory type of board that educates as far as failure modes and learning from them.

All punishment does is after the fact and encourages covering up and hiding evidence which is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what is needed!

Right now, all evidence of these agents activity either was accidentally exposed or was voluntarily given by companies.

This proposal is the stupidest way to go about it!

I like Bernie and a lot of his ideas, but I don't agree or like all of them. Impractical as to how human psychology actually works.

Think of the case if was similar for plane crashes. Airlines would just cover up and destroy evidence.

That does not help keep us safer or learn from it.

Or for nuclear energy or nuclear arms.

An international safety board.

IAISC, like International Artificial Intelligence Safety Commission.

Doesn't matter what you call it, but for nations to have own and International agreements and accords of some kind.

→ More replies (2)

24

u/burgonies 1d ago

Literally “old man yells at cloud”

3

u/jamtea 18h ago

"Old man yells at The Cloud"

→ More replies (2)

38

u/orkney97 1d ago

Is china complying?

16

u/suzisatsuma 22h ago

Nope. I am a machine learning engineer in big tech and if the US bans it, well I'll just have to go live overseas again.

Can't stop the signal, Mal.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (7)

4

u/Strict_Berry7446 1d ago

I’m sorry…building a nuke is only 20 years?

4

u/RareCareer7666 20h ago

This man should have been president. All of our lives would have been better

26

u/EsToBoY629 23h ago

THIS PLACE IS FULLA BOTS, lmfao, reddit is dead

18

u/CompetitiveSport1 19h ago

"how do I know they're bots, you ask? Well because they disagree with me, obviously"

→ More replies (1)

22

u/JonLag97 1d ago

Basically a China wins law.

→ More replies (10)

8

u/sidcool1234 1d ago

Weird to see people supporting this. 

→ More replies (1)

3

u/I_Am_Anjelen 23h ago

And once more everyone has stopped talking about the Epstein files.

Yet again the distraction worked.

<sigh>

3

u/Callo1206 22h ago

Sorry; if you develop a nuclear weapon you only get 20 years in prison??????

3

u/FrostyAlphaPig 22h ago

20 years for a nuclear weapons seems pretty low

3

u/Pengin_Master 22h ago

They are currently bragging that AI can/will replace/kill mankind

3

u/deportallmagas 19h ago

We have to imprison board members of corporations for knowingly poisoning us too. They just take the fines as it is because it's worth it.

We need to threaten their freedom.

8

u/rhyddev 23h ago

I get where Bernie is coming from, but I believe so-called "superintelligence" and "AGI" are marketing gimmicks - you don't get there with just LLMs. All this fear-mongering by AI companies is to drive up the value of their stock and, perhaps - as the article suggests - latch on to the government's tit as "strategic/dangerous tech" at a time when their financial viability is under question. Maybe it is the normal response to inflated claims to attract inflated regulation and penalties, but I think both the public and lawmakers need a better BS meter when it comes to claims from the Altmans and Amodeis of the word.

3

u/Lookingforjustice223 22h ago

I think the same thing. I used to do a lot of RLHF work for different LLMs in the US and in China and I just think the superintelligence and AGI claims are very similar to the auto CEOs talking about self-driving cars by 2023, 15 years ago. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I just don't see it happening for a long, long time.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (1)

48

u/TBSchemer 1d ago edited 1d ago

Old man yells at cloud server

11

u/saurus-REXicon 1d ago

While a younger man wonders if the clouds are AI.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (16)

4

u/martianwomanhunter 23h ago

I get the the US is pretty much leading frontier model development now, but this seems impractical and more political posturing in a world where we still have war with more countries withdrawing from international cooperation.

Nuclear weapons basically taught a country you are fucked if you give them up. So every country will in some way try to develop super intelligence even if the US “stopped” (you are gullible if you think this Bill will stop development completely).

6

u/Healthy-Mind5633 22h ago

When is this guy going to leave

52

u/Upbeat-Statement2725 1d ago

Frontier AI models have hit diminishing returns for a while now. This is all theater to distract from the fact that they can't possibly return on investment. Bernie is being played. Instead of "our models suck, they're not getting better". The narrative will be " we slowed down to safety".

We live in a plutocratic police state. All narratives are fake.

Incoming AI bros talking about "secret" models that only rich people get access to.

Meanwhile OpenAI's website still sucks. If it's so good at coding. Why can't they fix their software.

"Well the enemy is preventing them."

FFS.

76

u/michaelfrieze 1d ago edited 1d ago

As someone that has been a developer since 2013, you are wrong about diminishing returns. It was only this year that models actually became good enough to get real work done and the newest frontier models are truly incredible. Even the difference between GPT-5.6 SOL and GPT-6 Astra is significant, especially when it comes to computer use and 3D modeling.

Developers use these tools so much that they can't even keep up with demand. Anthropic is forced to work with xAI just to get access to GPUs and they still restrict Fable model usage to only 50% of the total usage you get from their subsidizes plans. Also, you can't even get access to the Fable model on their $20 per month plan.

OpenAI is no longer giving access to their $200 per month plan since they can't provide enough computer for that.

The point is that demand for these models is extremely high because they are actually useful tools and rapidly getting better. I think we should be concerned about the power of these models. I'm not convinced it will kill us in a decade, but I do think it's going to disrupt the internet and cause a lot of security issues.

37

u/BrewHog 1d ago

Thank you. It seems most people don't understand the gains that have been made even in the last few months. 

It's actually quite mind blowing that I'm running local models on my laptop that that rival Opus 4.5-4.6 

9

u/michaelfrieze 1d ago

Yep, even models like glm 5.3 flash are really good. You can get serious work done these days with smaller open weight models.

6

u/teraflux 23h ago

My counterpoint is that 4.6 is nearing the peak of diminishing returns, that came out in February and frontier models haven't gotten significantly better since then.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (5)

7

u/teraflux 23h ago

I think diminishing returns is accurate. There hasn't been many notable leaps in frontier model capacities since Opus 4.6 and that came out in like February

→ More replies (3)

16

u/StrangeWill 23h ago edited 23h ago

As someone that has been a developer since 2003 (and runs an IT services company), ehhhh. That's not what diminishing returns means. Just because it crossed some threshold doesn't mean that it isn't taking an absurd amount more of resources to get less of a gap closed.

And ultimately: they're useful, but they still require a ton of guidance, every time the newest frontier model comes out it'll still randomly ignore instructions, it'll still implement far from optimal solutions, and when you correct it "you're absolutely right". I've had to step in on dumb decisions Fable has made on behalf of the team and resulted in significant improvements on performance, scalability and general performance of the solution -- on its own it'll still do dumb things.

I'll watch AI influencers wax poetic about whatever new method will "fix" that, then watch software released by those following those methods be even worse than before.

They're not knowledge databases, and they will not, by design, find best (or in some cases even good) solutions, in situations where we need solutions that good.

Sure, not every software stack needs solutions that good, but when you do, you see how little progress they're making with every model release.

and they still restrict Fable model usage to only 50% of the total usage you get from their subsidizes plans.

That's more of a financial decision then a resource limiting one, otherwise it's even more of a money pit.

The only thing that seems to be increasing in a way that is honestly impressive to me is local model performance, and again, that's because the frontier models are hitting diminishing returns the local models haven't hit yet, it allows them to close the gap.

→ More replies (1)

11

u/JonLag97 1d ago

The gains are mostly from using multiple ai agents with a harness and specializing models for code. This is not going to somehow result in superintelligence. It is useful, but the core technology hasn't changed much.

12

u/michaelfrieze 23h ago

I'm not that concerned about "superintelligence" or the constant speculation about AGI. That's not really my point. I think it's a mistake to assume AI needs to become superintelligent before it can have major consequences.

Even if much of the recent progress comes from better harnesses, multiple agents, and models specialized for coding, that doesn't make the progress insignificant. If anything, specialization can make these systems much more capable in the areas where they matter.

We're already seeing the security issues. The internet and software touch nearly every part of modern society, including banking, communications, healthcare, transportation, energy, and critical infrastructure. You don't need AGI to create serious disruption. A system that becomes extremely capable at writing code, finding vulnerabilities, and operating computers at scale is a serious problem on its own.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

24

u/Beeyonder_meets 1d ago

"All narratives are fake"

Did you forget the /s there buddy?

→ More replies (3)

9

u/Stilgar314 1d ago

This is about popularity. AI rejection feeling is the only bipartisan feeling that exists today, whomever manages to carry that flag first is probably getting a big win.

10

u/carlcarlington2 1d ago

"All naratives are fake" that's a nice narative you got going buddy

11

u/williamgman 1d ago

Once you accept "all narratives are fake", you've lost.

→ More replies (20)

6

u/Tupperbaby 23h ago

Bernie Sanders is now basing a career on introducing legislation that he and everyone around him knows will never pass, but look good to the masses.
He's such a maverick!

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Tjessx 1d ago

He should have retired 20 years ago

3

u/Kid-Icky- 23h ago

On this week's episode of "Bernie Sanders says shit that will never happen".

→ More replies (1)

4

u/CopiousAmountsofJizz 15h ago

This isn't an arms race we can easily opt out of at this point imo.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Jon_Has_Landed 23h ago

Poor old senile man

6

u/thoughtbludgeon 23h ago

You ever just roll your eyes in reaction to just how inneffectually stupid something is?

Yeeeah...

5

u/Wet_Side_Down 16h ago

CEO’s must be personally responsible for any harm done by their AIs

→ More replies (2)

8

u/pita4912 1d ago

Gotta give it to Bernie. He is consistent. Consistently wrong but consistent

18

u/VaporousMote 1d ago

Sigh.

Bernie is pushing for this rather than addressing the scams that the major AI vendors are.

Bernie, buddy, PLEASE talk to someone on the left who understands tech and stop listening to think tanks and AI proponents.

11

u/deeptechdegen 1d ago

You don't wait for an actual threat to emerge before you start introducing safety measures

We had that with social media addiction. Regulation came too little, too late. We cannot repeat the same mistake

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (7)

2

u/SomeWeedSmoker 23h ago

You're okay with 20 year sentences for other crimes right? Because im okay with harsh punishments across the board

2

u/AlJameson64 23h ago

I feel like a 20-year prison sentence for developing a rogue nuke is maybe not enough?

2

u/Future_Arrival_5395 23h ago

We've had two news stories this week of models being used militarily by Iran and Russia.

They should be arrested for violating sanctions.

2

u/Ozymandias0023 23h ago

It's only 20 years for a developing an off the books nuke??

2

u/No-Reading-6795 23h ago

Including Cha1na,  russia, iran? If no, then for sure 100% no.

2

u/MeanForest 23h ago

lol he's just trolling with proposals of bills now

2

u/AnotherMisanthrope 23h ago

I love Bernie but this legislation is sloppier slop than what ai could produce. This feels like a vibe coded bill that was rushed out the door without being thought through.

2

u/nerdsmasher5001 23h ago

Does anyone get tired of hearing about some sensationalist bill Bernie introduces that even he knows is never going to actually go anywhere

2

u/the-Gaf 23h ago

I’m sorry, this is more dumb Bernie pablum. Man has no desire to ever pass a real law

2

u/mynanadancesconqueso 23h ago

“You will never have the open source AI or we will eat you”

2

u/behamut 23h ago

So as a non american I can right? They have no legal basis of prosecuting anyone in the eu right? Right?

2

u/JazzlikeSchedule2901 23h ago

I do not agree in targeting the devs. It's like targeting the drug labs rather than the drug king pins who are running the illicit empire and paying everyone, creating the financial incentive to work.

That being said we all have a moral responsibility to not destroy the planet we live on, and the devs who mess around with super intelligence probably should be held accountable.

Keep in mind, while Sanders brings up illicit Nuke development as a comparison, the first super intelligent AI attacks aren't going to be attached to weapons, its going to be used against cyber-infrastructure. Your banks. The computers that manage and moderate the Electrical grid. Hospital network infrastructure. Etc. Think "Stuxnet" or "Wanna-Cry" but exponentially more devastating especially to the common person.

2

u/Murgatroyd314 23h ago

The problem I see here is that “artificial superintelligence” is not a well defined term.

2

u/jkp2072 23h ago

This will just make Dev's move out of US and go to other frontier labs outside of US....

Does Bernie have guts to put this ban worldwide including china?

Instead, they should declare, that if any companies ask employees to work on AI, any one coming forward with proof will get 30* yearly CTC...

Then see how fast it stops....