28 governments signed a declaration agreeing to cooperate on risks of AI
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
He said that the latest LLMs demonstrate that while we think of human intelligence as being embedded in the brain, in fact it is mostly embedded in human language. The language processing part turns out to be more of a computational adjunct to the intelligence in language, which we have now begun to replace.
So a great deal of our intelligence as a species now exists as bits of language distributed across the net, accessible to any sufficient amount of compute, which is becoming cheap.
Our intelligence, the thing that puts us otherwise weak creatures at the apex of this pyramid, is no longer restricted to the Homo sapiens platform.
There's a distinct hierarchical relationship between a tool and a tool user. It seems likely that that relationship will invert when the tool becomes more intelligent than the user.
I'd like to be convinced that this externalization of intelligence isn't actually a big deal, or just wrong. It would help me sleep better.
Without language, we're just slightly clever apes.
LLMs have only reinforced this conclusion. AI folks like to say, "it's not thinking, it's only telling you the next most likely token". However, rather than dissuade me from thinking LLMs have some cognitive capability, it's only made me wonder if that's not all there is to my own intelligence.
It is strange to me that we might have knowledge that exists on that Internet that no human currently possesses in their mind.
That LLMs now have access to this knowledge and could explain things to us humans that would be completely novel to us.
I've always thought the Earth itself is slowly bexomint alive. Power plants are it's mitochondria. Datacenters as a distributed brain. Internet as the communication network. Transmitters and receivers it's mouth and ears.
I would argue that we are far more than that and that that idea diminishes us.
What will always set us apart from AI is that which cannot be written down, illustrated or otherwise defined. It is a river which AI will never cross.
Out of the countries that haven’t signed this, who do you foresee wrecking those signee countries using some homegrown powerful AI? New Zealand? Please lol.
Regulate it! Ban exports! It's dangerous!
Ok maybe we should all have access to it.
It's a start, but not an actual treaty or real political integration, which is what we need. Because AI is too much of an advantage in war to not use.
You forgot "co-founder of OpenAI".
[0]https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/gadgets-news/openai-the-...
Of course not.