Recent content by Grinkle

I suggest - AI is only safe if used responsibly - do be worried enough to pro-actively define and regulate responsible use.

To me, and I think to each of you, the crux of AI doomsday concerns vs not is faith in humanity vs not; my own more benign concern of voluntary mediocrity is also a concern around human nature more than AI per se. Some folks probably envision AI going rogue with no human culpability - I don't...

Do you define LLM vs Agent for your students? If you do, could I ask you to share how you distinguish them? In your analogy, is training a dog compared to training an LLM, or to instructing an Agent, or both? Or neither, if you don't find that distinction relevant to the concepts you teach.

I won't argue with the differences you note - if there is a case with a closer set of facts (there may well be) I'd love to read about it. I certainly agree this case was really weak. I think the fact that this case wasn't dismissed because one can't use existing defamation law in cases...

Here is a similar case (similar to how I imagine the situation in this thread might be presented at court if litigated) that according to the first link I posted is the first of its kind. The second link has the result, the first article was written before the case was resolved. Good...

Regarding the anecdotal declarations in this thread, I wonder how it can be possible to overcome the bias injected by ones own experience. I learned exclusively from textbooks until after my formal education was completed. For my core engineering courses, books were not terribly helpful to me...

From your initial post, I had thought you were drawing a comparison to natural selection, that's why I asked. I see where you are coming from now.

My first regulation is strict liability for harms. Much of the rest of the cautious behavior would flow from that. Credit to @Dale , I didn't think of that on my own.

My argument is not around whether or not AI development could be stopped in principle, its around whether or not AI can be stopped in practice absent specific actionable scenarios to motivate that stoppage. Your counter, while imo factual, doesn't address that - I agree putting the brakes on AI...

Costly in what sense?

That is his opinion, and the way he has stated it makes it untestable. If his concerns end up being valid, then imo there is nothing to be done about it. Even if one could overcome profit motive and curiosity motivations and get folks to agree not to build 'it', the above concern also drives...

I did not find him at all convincing. To me, the most memorable thing he said is that AI can be persuasive and this can pose a real danger. I agree with that. Outside that, I don't think he said anything specific enough to either agree or dis-agree with; it was, to my ears anyway, all...

This is where the rubber hits the road, so to speak, and I completely agree with the above snip. Here is a quote from the article you linked - The problem: The ATS is looking for title matches. So are hiring managers. They’ll scan a resume in 6 seconds. If they don’t immediately see the exact...

Here is an example of what I mean by the threat of humans voluntarily giving up critical thinking in favor of letting AI do or pretend to do our critical thinking for us. The story itself is behind a paywall that I don't pay for, so I haven't read it. That said, the claim made in the abstract...

@jack action Look for simulated annealing (SA) algorithms and search for their applications if you are not familiar, it may give you some insight into where randomness is helpful that hadn't occurred to you before. I suspect the temperature setting that @gleem mentioned as a control parameter...