An AI crash is our best bet for restricting AI

post by Remmelt (remmelt-ellen) · 2024-10-11T02:12:03.491Z · LW · GW · 3 comments

Contents

3 comments

3 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by Nicholas / Heather Kross (NicholasKross) · 2024-10-18T17:44:56.811Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

For more details on (the business side of) a potential AI crash, see recent articles by the blog Where's Your Ed At, which wrote the sorta-well-known post "The Man Who Killed Google Search".

For his AI-crash posts, start here and here and click on links to his other posts. Sadly, the author falls into the trap of "LLMs will never get to reasoning because they don't, like, know stuff, man", but luckily his core competencies (the business side, analyzing reporting) show why an AI crash could still very much happen.

Replies from: NicholasKross
↑ comment by Nicholas / Heather Kross (NicholasKross) · 2024-11-10T17:36:11.622Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

EDIT: Due to the incoming administration's ties to tech investors, I no longer think an AI crash is so likely. Several signs [EA(p) · GW(p)] IMHO point to "they're gonna go all-in on racing for AI, regardless of how 'needed [EA · GW]' it actually is".

Replies from: remmelt-ellen
↑ comment by Remmelt (remmelt-ellen) · 2024-11-11T03:34:00.634Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

I'm also feeling less "optimistic" about an AI crash given:

  1. The election result involving a bunch of tech investors and execs pushing for influence through Trump's campaign (with a stated intention to deregulate tech).
  2. A military veteran saying that the military could be holding up the AI industry like "Atlas holding the globe", and an AI PhD saying that hyperscaled data centers, deep learning, etc, could be super useful for war.

I will revise my previous forecast back to 80%+ chance.