• 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

Ziggurat said:
That's why those same billionaire tech bros are advocating for such a regulatory regime? To save everyone else from themselves? Of course not. They're being selfish bastards, they aren't trying to protect you.
Click to expand...
In business everybody's a selfish bastard.

Nevertheless, Elon Musk has long been warning about the potential dangers of AI, and now Sam Altman is joining him. I think both of them are genuinely concerned about what the industry might accidentally unleash.

This is not unheard of. The Health and Morals of Apprentices Act 1802 (AKA Factories Act) was introduced by factory owner Sir Robert Peel, who said:-
Having other pursuits, it was not often in my power to visit the factories, but whenever such visits were made, I was struck with the uniform appearance of bad health, and, in many cases, stinted growth of the children; the hours of labour were regulated by the interest of the overseer, whose remuneration depending on the quantity of the work done, he was often induced to make the poor children work excessive hours, and to stop their complaints by trifling bribes. Finding our own factories under such management, and learning that the like practices prevailed in other parts of the kingdom where similar machinery was in use...
Click to expand...
Nobody should be more aware of the potential danger from advanced AI than the visionaries who are creating it, and we shouldn't dismiss their warnings just because they stand to profit from it. Even if their concern is completely self-serving (which I don't think is true) they still want AI to be seen in a positive light, and so have a vested interest in preventing it from going rogue.

Ziggurat said:
China is backing US groups opposed to AI and data centers. Did you not know this?
Click to expand...
That's not what I asked.

China AI Regulation Overview
Interim Measures for the Administration of Generative AI Services (2023): Cross-sectoral administrative framework governing public-facing generative AI services, requiring lawful training data sourcing, content moderation, risk mitigation, labeling, and algorithm registration...
Interim Measures for the Administration of Anthropomorphic AI Interaction Services (2025/2026): Interim regulation governing AI simulating human personality and emotion, mandating AI identification prompts, anti-addiction controls, minor and elderly protections, and safety assessments.
Ethics-Safety Guidelines for Artificial Intelligence Applications 1.0 (2026): TC260 technical guideline articulating nine ethics-safety principles, operational risk controls, audit logging, continuous model reviews, and multidisciplinary safety boards.
Click to expand...
The answer is, China already has a strong regulatory framework in place for AI.

As for opposition to data centers (which is not the same thing as opposing AI):-
The theory taking the rich by storm: China funds data center haters
The theory that China is paying local activists in America to oppose data centers is catching on like wildfire among the Silicon Valley elite, despite a lack of evidence. Wealthy investors are naming names and pointing fingers, even if they can't directly link their projects' opponents to China... Linvill said he can't rule out that the Chinese are quietly paying influencers or others to oppose data centers, but he pointed out there's no need. "I think in this case, the people talking about data centers are real people with real passions and real perspectives and real opinions."
Click to expand...
Now we see the reason China is being blamed for opposition to AI data centers, to dismiss the opposition from real Americans who don't want it in their back yard.
 
SpuriusMaximus said:
No kidding. A human runs at about the same power requirement as an old lightbulb, that is, 100W. Unless they're doing some heavy physical work or exercise, of course.
Click to expand...
Tesla's Hardware 3 FSD AI processor uses a maximum of 72 watts. With this it's able to drive as well as a human. HW4 uses up to 144 watts, and is about 5 times better than the average human driver.

There is no reason believe AI won't become dramatically more power-efficient in the future. The only reason it hasn't happened yet is that electricity is cheap and abundant. However this only applies to data centers, not eg. cars and robots. Future AI architecture will be quite different from the LLMs of today. It will work with smaller data sets and be much smarter. This will happen because there is a big incentive to do it.
 
Ziggurat said:
That remains to be seen. China has lots of regulations that are not actually well enforced. About the only rules they do consistently enforce are those that directly protect the regime.
Click to expand...
Do you think the CCP would pursue the development of a machine that humans can not control?

Seems unllikely to me, such a thing absolutely would threaten their total control .
 
Last edited:
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump

The same people that said, “We’ll all be dead in twelve years because of Global Warming,” a name since “reborn” to Climate Change, because the Planet was cooling, not warming, and nobody was dead, are the people that are now saying that AI is going to kill us, that robots are going to attack us, and everything is a DISASTER.
This is more of a Hoax than even that of RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, UKRAINE, UKRAINE, UKRAINE, UKRAINE, and Climate Change!
Whoever wins AI, WINS!
We are leading now over China, and everyone else, and I’m going to keep it that way! I’m not going to stifle Growth, of something that will be bigger than the Industrial Revolution, or the Internet, itself.
We will be careful, and that’s why we have the Department of Justice, and other Law Enforcement bodies, that will rein things in if we have to, but I will only encourage AI or, SI (SUPER INTELLIGENCE)!

President DONALD J. TRUMP
 
Frank Newgent said:
Do you think the CCP would pursue the development of a machine that humans can not control?
Click to expand...
Not intentionally. But I don't think anyone will intentionally make an AI they can't control.

And again, I'm not worried about a Skynet scenario. I don't actually find that plausible. What's far more likely is not that an AI goes rogue and develops and independent will to power, but that it becomes sufficiently complex that we misdirect it by accident.

China didn't intentionally leak a deadly virus that turned into a global pandemic, but it still happened. The USSR didn't intentionally make a nuclear reactor suffer catastrophic runaway criticality, but it still happened. Communist regimes do not have a good safety record, regardless of what rules they nominally institute.
 
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