Comment by 0xDEAFBEAD
8 hours ago
Person: "AI, please make me paperclips."
AI: "OK, I've now converted the entire planet into paperclips."
Alien observer #1: "Wow, that was a rogue AI!"
Alien observer #2: "False. We need to place the blame where it belongs, on the person who requested the paperclips."
Ultimately this type of terminology dispute has a tendency to miss the point.
It does, indeed. Because OAI is not just a singular person, as in your scenario. No single person has access to controlling agents at the scale OAI has. Let's not conflate Frontier providers with "Person".
I'm not exactly sure why you think this distinction is so important. I think my point stands if you replace "Person" with "OpenAI". In any case, I presume the swarms OpenAI has been researching will be available to the general public before too long.
It makes a big difference: individuals do not have the capabilities to run millions of dollars of opportunistic hacking loop inference. That's why the distinction is important, they are not the same thing you've conflated them down to.
1 reply →
That legal fiction works both ways.
That's super cute. Care to share beyond a smarmy comment that has no depth?
2 replies →