sp527

You need to reread what was written. No one is proposing to take away your right to leak proprietary edge to the rapacious frontier labs that need to eat most of the economy in order to survive.

A comment you wrote six months ago: "Israel can do better, but Israel committing genocide is not the fact legally."

Are those sheep able to reason about particle physics?

Our machines are now more intelligent than most humans, which would have qualified as "fantasy" as recently as 3 years ago. Clearly some people will only give up on this flawed reasoning exactly when the robot boot is pressed against their throat lmao.

> They are chaotic, which people confuse for non-deterministic.

That's an odd argument, because a lot of people who have struggled to decipher complex chaotic systems would tell you this is a distinction without much of a difference.

> I consider OpenAI to be as economically motivated as any other actor in this space and playing around with user data like that would destroy their business.

And that's exactly why you can only see evidence of this when the stakes are high enough, such as solving a Millenium problem. The legalese they outputted in response to the incident left them an escape hatch that permits the possibility of theft. People familiar with corporate damage control should recognize the verbal maneuvering, often used to paper over actual guilt.

There was also already a high prior of shadiness. The company is run by someone who is close enough in reputation to "known sociopath".

It's actually far more reasonable to assume that OpenAI stole user data to generate a breakthrough. They have an unbelievably high economic motive to do so. And even a low chance that they might be doing this implies catastrophic risk to anyone with valuable knowledge.

> Even if OAI had zero data from Buckmaster's sessions, this is in very poor taste and highly unethical. You are front running a researcher just to be able to say you did it first? Tao is right - OAI is treating math results like oil. This is the like Exxon getting a whiff of a massive oil field and racing to the punch by deploying their full crew.

I want to be clear that I agree with this view and with Tao more generally. But we're all just yelling at the wind now.

> Tristan's argument from his essay was that it is hard to brute force with a vanilla prompt (even for seasoned mathematicians) unless you knew very specifically what to mention i.e the search space would have been intractable even for OAI's compute budget.

This is a bad argument. This is clearly not how it works. And unless Tristan is some truly alien-like savant (and maybe he is), what's necessary to initiate the AI's work already exists in countless published research papers and not exclusively in his head or notes. AIs can survey the sum total of all prior work on a problem and discern reasonable paths for inquiry.

Tristan is acting as if he's working off of an outdated model of AI, similar to primitive chess-playing models that winnowed the search space much more deterministically. If someone this intelligent truly doesn't get that this is not at all what AI is anymore, then maybe there's no hope that we ever understand it.

But I think he does realize this and he's flailing about for counterarguments from a place of bitterness and dejection, accepting even those that are too weak to be defensible. And that is very human and even forgivable.

Well, in fairness, the OP asked for counterpoints. He didn't stipulate that they need to be reasonable.

If we were to examine your political views, I'm quite certain that your positions would correlate highly with those of the Democratic Party, and likely rather closely to its most polarized incarnation found in San Francisco.

By contrast, I make up my own mind on each individual issue. I believe strongly in restrictive and controlled legal immigration, orchestrated in a manner that maximally benefits the citizenry to which a government is beholden. I support anti-trust enforcement. I am in favor of legalized abortion. I am opposed to wealth taxes that might trigger capital flight. I am in favor of progressive property tax levies on luxury homes. I am strongly in favor of solar geo-engineering as a solution to climate change (unlike progressives). I am deeply opposed to tariffs as a mechanism to remedy the woes of the disenfranchised. I support right to work laws.

I do not have a political home. I choose what I see as good sense and it aligns with no party. THAT is what a true moderate is.

> The electorate at large eventually learning their lesson is cold comfort to anyone that warned of this, and suffered regardless

The problem with this statement is that, in context, it clearly only prioritizes the interests and suffering of particular groups.

MAGA emerged because an altogether different group was completely disenfranchised by neoliberalism and ignored for a very long time. But it turns out they were still a major part of our country and they still had voting power.

So did the system actually break or did it work precisely as intended?

The agenda is TRUTH, which apparently doesn't matter anymore because almost everyone has become a tribal extremist.

I consider myself an accidental moderate. I look for the best answer. I don't turn off my brain and bow down to any specific party or platform.

> They also want to deport Germans with attained citizenship. It's what they said out loud. There are records of this.

It's what who said aloud? When and where? At the referenced Potsdam meeting where certain extremist CDU politicians did the same?

If I judged Democrats in the US by what their most extreme members have said, I would have to assume a vote for them would be a vote to end private property. But I don't assume that, because I'm not a moron.

So, show me a trusted source that argues a plurality of mainstream AfD politicians are claiming they want to deport German citizens. Show me where this is the official policy of the party. I see no good source to support that accusation.

And that's likely because it is in fact what it appears to be: a desperate smear campaign generated by extremists arrayed at the opposing political polarity. And it's also apparently failing since large percentages of the German population are moving the other way.

This is entirely reminiscent of the foolishness that sunk the Democrats in the US and put us in the mess we now find ourselves in. "Why moderate our policy stances when we can just call them bigots and Nazis instead?"

I expect the outcome of this strategy will be much the same in Germany.