SB-1047 would definitely have a chilling effect on open source AI and the entire AI ecosystem.
Very much hoping that Governor @GavinNewsom will veto it.
How could computers multiplying numbers lead to "literal human extinction?"
Doomers never say how, and politicians never press them because they imagine something like Terminator.
The whole thing is an absurd clownshow.
@austin_rief They are paying the millions for an external party to tell the company what they can not say for political/cultural/relationship reasons internally.
@timothysc I am actually interested in trying that. Why? Because I want a standardized way to rebuild all dependencies for a specific ISA target. Right now I am rebuilding a bunch of Fedora packages - but that is painful. So thinking about moving to Gentoo or Nix.
I am pretty sure that Space X is working on something in this area. What is the plan?
Or are they going to do what the book #DeltaV speculates and just keep the resources in space, build there?
"AI may eliminate millions of jobs, but it also may help us cure cancer" Do you know how many well paying jobs depend on cancer? So are you suggesting we keep that around? If not, what is the point?
Maybe if we red teamed legislation as fiercely we red team AI, we'd get better legislation.
Sadly many people who propose legislation are actively hostile to any and all feedback.
This post from a lawyer, engineer and former FTC employee looks at the unintended side effects of legislation like SB1047 and how "reasonable" is always in the mind of the beholder and the enforcer.
1. These are not whistleblowers. They exposed no crime. This is not Enron. They didn't even expose bad security practices, just practices they felt were not good enough for them.
2. OpenAI just publicly stated that they oppose this legislation, because it is poorly designed. They also said they favor federal legislation.
3. Just because someone supports legislation in general does not mean they have to support bad legislation.
An important op-ed by Mark Zuckerberg (Meta) and Daniel Ek (Spotify) in The Economist about the fuzzy and disparate regulatory landscape in the EU and how it is becoming an obstacle to the development and deployment of technology in the EU, particularly when it comes to AI and open source.
@tsarnick This is an absolutely clownish take that gets more unhinged as we go along. When this is the kind of commentary coming from respected tech leaders is it even surprising that people are confused? Like go make infinite TikToks and steal all the users? What the actual hell?
Even if we deindustrialized Europe back into Middle Ages as some degrowth weirdos dream of, it wouldn’t help climate too much.
The problem is somewhere else, unfortunately even throwing tomato soup at Mona Lisa has fairly limited impact in this regard.