Wow, niet de minsten

Na de toekomst van eenzaamheid, pornografie, rouw, nasynchronisatie, oogcontact, fotomodellen/fotografen, Facial Motion Capture, het "nu al niet meerte beheersen" GPT-4 en Midjourney v5 beginnen de captains of industry het toch tijd voor een adempauze te vinden.

We citeren maar gewoon even uit de petitie:

"*Contemporary AI systems are now becoming human-competitive at general tasks,[3] and we must ask ourselves: Should we let machines flood our information channels with propaganda and untruth? Should we automate away all the jobs, including the fulfilling ones? Should we develop nonhuman minds that might eventually outnumber, outsmart, obsolete and replace us? Should we risk loss of control of our civilization? Such decisions must not be delegated to unelected tech leaders. Powerful AI systems should be developed only once we are confident that their effects will be positive and their risks will be manageable. *

This confidence must be well justified and increase with the magnitude of a system's potential effects. OpenAI's recent statement regarding artificial general intelligence, states that "At some point, it may be important to get independent review before starting to train future systems, and for the most advanced efforts to agree to limit the rate of growth of compute used for creating new models." We agree. That point is now.

Therefore, we call on all AI labs to immediately pause for at least 6 months the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4*. This pause should be public and verifiable, and include all key actors. If such a pause cannot be enacted quickly, governments should step in and institute a moratorium.*

AI labs and independent experts should use this pause to jointly develop and implement a set of shared safety protocols for advanced AI design and development that are rigorously audited and overseen by independent outside experts. These protocols should ensure that systems adhering to them are safe beyond a reasonable doubt.[4] This does not mean a pause on AI development in general, merely a stepping back from the dangerous race to ever-larger unpredictable black-box models with emergent capabilities."

Wat vindt u, de kenner, ervan?

Prof. dr. Hans Jansen (vzmh) schreef het al: u wordt vervangen.

Studie! Dus, academisch als we hier zijn laten we het lekker over aan de Abstract: "We investigate the potential implications of Generative Pre-trained Transformer (GPT) models and related technologies on the U.S. labor market. (...) Our findings indicate that approximately 80% of the U.S. workforce could have at least 10% of their work tasks affected by the introduction of GPTs, while around 19% of workers may see at least 50% of their tasks impacted. The influence spans all wage levels, with higher-income jobs potentially facing greater exposure."

De gehele studie vindt u hier in PDF, uw opleiding tot timmerman start u hier.

Brisant draadje door Stanford-professor Computational Psychology Michal Kosinski

Snappen we bij benadering wat hier staat? Eigenlijk niet, want hier werken alleen mensen met een echte baan (blogger). Maar volgens Kosinski had GPT-4 slechts 30 minuten nodig om een eerste niet-werkende code te schrijven en deze vervolgens *zelfstandig* te corrigeren tot een werkende jailbreak. Kosinski: "I am worried that we will not be able to contain AI for much longer. (...) I think that we are facing a novel threat: AI taking control of people and their computers. It's smart, it codes, it has access to millions of potential collaborators and their machines. It can even leave notes for itself outside of its cage. How do we contain it?" Wat vindt de bovenmodaal verdienende, benedenmodaal gestelde sterveling (u) daarvan?