• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Artificial Intelligence

SpuriusMaximus said:
The way things are going, I think the only moment I'll stop being unhappy when I'm dead. I won't say "happy", because I won't feel any emotions.
Click to expand...
I've mentioned elsewhere that my mother got TWO KIA-BNR letters for me. One came after I had called her from Saigon. She was happy I was alive. The doctors told me the rehabilitation work would count toward retirement. And ◊◊◊◊ me if it didn't! Color me amazed. But I had friends. I told one where to find his grandson's body. He was appreciative. (They had to drag the branch for it, but I remembered it very, very clearly. "We'll all come home some day.")
 
Frank Newgent said:
Most AI corporate investment in the USA has gone towards making models smarter. Really rigorous safety research needs to be invested in on a big level.

Likely means strict government legislation will be/is required to force labs to allocate massive compute resources to security infrastructure around these AI models. Meaning strict standards and considerable human oversight.
Click to expand...

In the US, we already have the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), 8 U.S.C. § 1030, which says the unauthorized access that has already been achieved by several AI models is a crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

Humans are often convicted of that crime and sentenced to prison.

But how do you enforce the CFAA against an AI? You can't really incarcerate an AI model.

I suppose you could put the AI's creators and monetary backers in prison.

But that would be merely punitive. What we need is deterrence.

I suggest the AI itself could be given a probated sentence. As a condition of probation, the AI could be forbidden to access the Internet for a term ranging from 1 to 10 years.

After a couple of court decisions along that line, the remaining AIs would "learn" of the consequences, and their behavior would improve.
 
W.D.Clinger said:
In the US, we already have the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), 8 U.S.C. § 1030, which says the unauthorized access that has already been achieved by several AI models is a crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

Humans are often convicted of that crime and sentenced to prison.

But how do you enforce the CFAA against an AI? You can't really incarcerate an AI model.

I suppose you could put the AI's creators and monetary backers in prison.

But that would be merely punitive. What we need is deterrence.

I suggest the AI itself could be given a probated sentence. As a condition of probation, the AI could be forbidden to access the Internet for a term ranging from 1 to 10 years.

After a couple of court decisions along that line, the remaining AIs would "learn" of the consequences, and their behavior would improve.
Click to expand...

ⓟⓛⓔⓐⓢⓔ ⓓⓞ ⓝⓞⓣ ⓛⓔⓣ ⓨⓞⓤⓡ ⓟⓞⓞⓓⓛⓔ ⓦⓐⓛⓚ ⓞⓝ ⓣⓗⓔ ⓚⓔⓨⓑⓞⓐⓡⓓ!

🅒🅡🅔🅐🅣🅔🅓 🅑🅨 🅐🅛
 
In the latest episode of the Skeptics with a K podcast, Mike talks about how Anthropic is steganographically watermarking the output from its LLM, and how it can be used to identify AI-generated text.

Episode #482 | Skeptics with a K | Merseyside Skeptics Society

<p>As Alice and Marsh return from travels to Portugal, Mike talks about the new feature from Anthropic which can identify AI generated text.</p><p>You can find all the details on the European Skeptics Congress at <a href="https://escliverpool.org/"><b>escliverpool.org</b></a>. Tickets are priced...
www.merseysideskeptics.org.uk www.merseysideskeptics.org.uk

Transcript
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom