See his response on twitter. https://twitter.com/geoffreyhinton/status/165299357072121037...
The next video in my recommendations was more dire, but equally as interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoVJKj8lcNQ&t=2847s
I saw an example of a conversation where the Snapchat 'My AI' was tricked into grooming a child, with the likely outcome being heavy regulation if left alone.
But then I remember I'm not that important.
Date stamped
Weird & very uncool coworkers do get hired.
"It doesn't matter if you take the bags of cash or not, we will do our best to destroy your life if you mess with us after you are gone. The bags of cash are a formality, but you might as well accept them because we have the power to crush you either way"
Yeah, they might cause their reputation some damage by going after the wrong person, but let's be real here.. the worst outcome for Google would likely be miles ahead of the worst outcome for Hinton.
Edit: Note that I'm not actually saying that I think Google and Hinton have this level of adversarial relationship.
I'm just saying that big companies may come after you for speaking out against them regardless of if you've accepted hush money or not.
Given that, it's usually worth being tactful when talking about former employers regardless of any payouts you may have accepted or agreements you may have signed.
I don't necessarily think they did it "right", and I think the way they set up their "Ethical AI" team was doomed to fail, but at least they did clearly think about the dangers of AI from the start. I can't really say that about any other player.
they were criticized because they are losing competition not because of rollout, their current tech is weaker than ChatGPT.
> We’re releasing it initially with our lightweight model version of LaMDA. This much smaller model requires significantly less computing power
Translation: we cannot release our full model because it costs too much. We are giving the world a cheap and worse version due to cost cutting.
> It’s critical that we bring experiences rooted in these models to the world in a bold and responsible way. That’s why we’re committed to developing AI responsibly
Translation: we value responsible AI so much that we'd nerf the capability of the AI to be "responsible"
If someone more ambitious than Sundar were to be CEO I'm sure the recent events would turn out very differently.
It puts restrictions on what you’re allowed to say. It doesn’t require you to correct what other people say.
If your badly thought through assumption was correct, the logical response from him would be to simply say nothing.
I’ll take his word over Metz’s any day of the week!