Ah, I see we’ve reached the point of “Don’t Look Up” where members of the public are actively mad that they’re being warned of the incoming meteor.
AI progress is not a force of nature, there are concrete actors pushing it forward at great costs.
> The plaintiffs don’t object to the companies individually deciding to slow their own progress in favor of safety. They instead argue in the complaint that antitrust laws forbid them from taking the “shortcut” of agreeing to “substitute collective restraint for individual accountability.” A competitive market allows for responsibility and genuine progress, the lawsuit argues.
> “AI will quickly spin out of human control and could kill us all if we allow AI safety and protocol ... to be controlled by private self-serving agreements between the world’s most powerful ‘for profit’ technology companies,” said Nick Rowley, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs.
--
I wish I had something more insightful to add, but I'm dumbstruck. May the holy market save us all (in the name of the dollar, the growth rate, and Jerome Powell, amen)
""[P]laintiff’s opposition is absolutely untrue except that I am prejudiced against her. I despise her and would rather shovel manure than represent her at trial"
They may well be wrong, but I'm not sure you can dismiss them so easily.
And the fact it is a prisoner dilemma problem doesn't mean it's unsolvable, sure it makes it hard, but we have made _some_ progress on climate change and that's a prisoner dilemma problem.