cross-posted from: https://feddit.online/c/tech@piefed.world/p/2029056/406-scientists-demand-ai-models-be-cut-off-from-the-internet-immediately-and-demand-a-m
cross-posted from: https://feddit.online/c/tech@piefed.world/p/2029056/406-scientists-demand-ai-models-be-cut-off-from-the-internet-immediately-and-demand-a-m
It’s not at all stupid, because there’s no such thing as a “rogue agent,” only rogue users of AI. With proper airgapping, there’s no such thing as a “rogue agent.”
But isn’t that the problem? You can’t force a rogue user to do anything; or they wouldn’t be rogue. So why should they apply air gapping to their agents?
Because if they don’t, they could face jail time personally or their company is fined to death? That’s how you apply corrective pressure to those thinking about “going rogue”.
I must be missing something, because you’re getting a bunch of upvotes. I don’t disagree with anything you said, but it feels like a total non-sequitur to what I was saying.
Yes - proper air-gapping is a good idea. But asking the big AI labs to air gap is kind of pointless. Liability already gives them legal incentives to avoid incidents. If that didn’t stop them, a letter signed by a bunch of academics sure won’t. More importantly, open-weight models capable of doing all the things that we’re concerned about are already in the hands of bad actors around the world.
This letter is asking us to lock the front door of the house when the back wall is missing.
The majority of lemmy seems to not understand the concept of a pandoras box and tends to just talk in circles are the reality of the situation to various degrees.
People are too hung up on hating AI to actually stop and look around them and realize what is physically and technically possible basically doesn’t align at all which 99.99% of what people want to happen.
Stricter regulation and holding people responsible for their agents should be a thing yes and no one sane will disagree.
But the reality of how that’s even do able is VASTLY different then what people want it to mean.
No it isn’t. We could have comprehensive regulations by this time tomorrow if the people in power had the will to.
That’s quite optimistic, especially since there’s almost no enforcement of liability.
Computational resources are the limiting factor. AI companies have resources which no independent actor could ever dream of, which makes them far more dangerous to the general public. A chihuahua with an attitude problem can only do so much damage. A Great Dane with an attitude problem is a threat no one can afford to ignore.