Altman, Amodei, Pinchai etc can get together and just put a self imposed ban on themselves and ask the us government to sanction any entity/state attempting to use/release a Recursive Self improving model until the risks are well understood.
This does not mean they can't keep developing it. But it would mean they do not release them to the general public or the public domain. The US government can continue to use and fund these models that are more powerful and use them in situations they understand and a restricted setting. The pentagon has a larger budget than any VC.
Remove the profit motive on self improving recursive models gained from retail/commercial use!
Would also mean their labs most be fully airgapped and made safe from all known covert channels, no matter how ridiculously theoretical. In fact, their meat proxies, who may be brainwashed into acting on the AI's behalf, must also be kept in extreme isolation. And to make sure that nobody will get close we will need to figure out a way to warn people. Probably start out with a series of signs...
This place is a message... and part of a system of messages... pay attention to it!
This is not a place of honor... no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here... nothing valued is here.
What is here was dangerous and repulsive to us. This mesage is a warning about danger.
The danger is in a particular location... it increases toward a center...
One thing i am curious about is if anyone who is fluent in a romance language(en/es/fr etc) but their native language was a non-romance one(e.g. japanese or hindi) felt it better using the latter exclusively?
Are you guys feeling all high and mighty doing all these predictions? I think the money they are spending on trying to inform policy could be better spent on getting all major labs together with the government, and making sure that
1. At least 10% of your net spend is on safety and harm mitigation before you accelerate yourselves into doing real harm to real people tomorrow.
2. Pause all AI enhancement until a proper mechanistic study can be done by a working group funded by you all to understand how AI model Safety can be enforced by something less lame than a Constitution/Spec.
Noob question, I recall https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49491791 mentioned how the kernel source code and diffs were being crawled excessively. All else being equal, won't all the AI crawling agents mean traffic to docs should at least be stable(presuming changes happen all the time)?
And also the fact that agents are solving anubis level 5 challenges Tailwind would not be able to figure out how much traffic is from people vs bots. So that would mean the traffic should be up...
Perhaps its time that YC mentioned explicitly that if they are going to fund a company which holds specific PII data(i would include precise location history to start with) they would have to guarantee:
1. An erase-me feature if they gained over say some X unique/active users.
2. Disclose to their best legal abilities on warrants served in the countries that allow such disclosure. Allow for strong whistle blower protection if warrantless wiretapping becomes a thing.
Why would they do that? Venture capital isn't there to serve people like us or to protect any kind of common interest. There is only one thing they know - money.
Sure, but YC can enforce it if they want to. VC after all is a private body governed by private individuals, they can make moral choices. VCs could even support this by offering terms to offset the costs.
I cannot believe that a company cannot be profitable but at the same time not build for at least some better privacy guarantees.
They could do anything if they wanted to, but there's no point in discussing it, because they won't. Self-enforcing moral standards interferes with the money thing, which is the only thing they will not sacrifice. The goal isn't profitability, there's been plenty of profitable and moral ventures in the past. They need as much money as possible. They lie awake at night thinking about the cents they could squeeze out of a business if they just treated their customers way worse, partnered with a dictatorship or found loopholes in regulations.
Google did make location history private in the maps app(delete on server side) at some point, if I recall correctly everyone can at the least opt in(i may be wrong and it may even be opt out!). I believe out of the exact concerns of warrantless sweep of all location data of all users around a lat long for server side storage by law enforcement.
It went under the radar but is a good example of _some_ incremental positive improvement over centralized storage.
Per friends who have done this, you apparently need to explain why and have reasons™. It’s not just a quick “hi forget me” request. All of which I find a bit absurd.
I should have been more clear. You have to give reasons why, as in - if your identity is at risk, legal issues, company concerns..etc. This was the push back my friends and I have joked about (only two so far who have made this request).
The request is not taken at face value, you have to have it approved.
Congrats on the launch. I had a vague idea about personalized medication, did not know it was the VC style scaling of 10m$->100m$ ARR business!
There are some messages here complaining about the website being claude(ish). I know HN has people that care about this. They should. Mostly they would be right. But i don't see it being relevant here. Complaining about this business's website is like fluid-mechanics engineers at NASA complaining about friction dynamics on office floor-carpeting instead of rockets.
Why can't we just be satisfied with wayy old mac versions in VMs on linux, ones where you played prince or persia or oregon trail, the fun looking black and white versions and some later ones their steel windows UIs, the theming, the file explorer, the note taker app.
Isn't that level of fun one gets from looking at that enough?
Noob question: do good harnesses automatically optimize for bad tool calling behavior automatically?
reply