This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
My favorite part of this timeline has been how OpenAI went from a non-profit foundation meant to democratize AI research into a for-profit subsidiary of the most ruthless monopoly of the last 30 years, with zero regard for AI safety if there is any chance to sniff a profit.
Yeah Sam Altman is a machiavellian genius deal-maker, apparently. Or he was in the right place at the right time.
Either way, he absolutely scooped those nerds at Google trying to just build tech for humanity and do research.
Very depressing how Google (the leader up until 2021 and maybe even still) chose not to release products, presumably for ethical reasons, and then Microsoft just bought OpenAI, gave GPT-4 access to the internet and said "let her rip".
It's a bad sign. It makes it more likely that people will adopt the attitude that there's no point in containing AI since if I don't do it, someone else will.
but...that is obviously true. And was always obviously true. And you're saying it's bad if more people come to this true conclusion?
It's kinda hilarious, but a) there actually was a lot of conversation about this as a possible solution in LessWrong spheres in the late Obama era, and b) there's still people today, here making the "just don't do that" argument.
I don't think it should be surprising anymore, given the failed efforts post-COVID to provide serious oversight of even our own country's gain-of-function research, but I found that pretty disappointing.
More options
Context Copy link
Yes. It's bad. Microsoft's irresponsibility has pushed the timeline forward.
Thus all the memes of:
2015: "Obvious no one will hook AGI up to the internet"
2023: Leeroy Jenkins!!!
Perhaps it was inevitable. Perhaps it is even desirable according to some convoluted reasoning about hardware overhangs or whatever. For me, I'd prefer to live more years in the human era.
Just because defection seems inevitable doesn't absolve the first person to defect from responsibility.
Defection is inevitable when arguments for AI safety are bad and fail to convince most intelligent agents in the space.
We could agree on non proliferation of nuclear weapons because the harms are obvious and the benefits are essentially just more power. AI is a whole different ballgame.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Did Google not release anything for ethical reasons, or was it because they were a bunch of naval-gazers with the economic discipline of a DMV office?
I've seen claims that shipping everything was becoming impossible due to too much paper-pushing and people with veto power, so..
More options
Context Copy link
They didn’t want to release AI because it couldn’t help noticing inconvenient patterns in society
Well if they were determined enough to ship something they could have figured out a way to beat it over the head until it stops noticing (like OpenAI did). That’s part of the “economic discipline” thing.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Given Google’s track record with finished products, there isn’t much doubt what the reason was.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link