Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Makes me wonder (Score 1) 128

Obviously, I agree.

My other question, is how long will they be able to get away with this sort of thing, before customers decide the risk of disclosing your data to these external AI firms, is greater than the cost of building the capacity to run your own models in-house.

I don't use LLM, generally. But I was messing around and got some older models running on my laptop last night. Nothing special, no idea what I would use them for (couldn't generate a paragraph of text before clearing losing all coherence, because these were small old models running on 5 year old hardware). Supposedly Mac Studios and Mac minis are selling like hotcakes because hobbyists want to run local models. How long before the Venn Diagram for "can be run locally" and "capable enough model" overlaps for most use cases, making the risk of data exfiltration by these firms not worth the risk?

Lot of words to say this kind of thing may accelerate the bubble bursting.

Submission + - Anthropic researcher believes more than 10% chance AI 'could kill all humans' (bbc.com)

fahrbot-bot writes: The BBC is reporting that a top safety researcher at Anthropic has warned AI is advancing so quickly he believes there is a greater than 10% chance it "could kill all humans" within the next decade.

Evan Hubinger said in a post on X the risk from the models which currently exist was "low" but he was "worried" the technology might develop and improve itself soon to the point where it posed an existential risk to humanity.

He did not spell out how he thought AI systems could in future result in humans being wiped out. But his comments are the latest in a series of increasingly stark warnings about AI, with the debate shifting from whether it truly poses a risk to how big that risk is.

Hubinger's intervention was in response to another post on X from Jacob Coxon, an AI researcher who has just quit Anthropic and previously worked at OpenAI.

"Neither company is acting responsibly," he wrote.

"These will soon be superhuman systems that can hack anything, revolutionise any field overnight, and acquire real power and resources."

OpenAI has been approached for comment.

[No word on how AIs feel about Black Jack and hookers though. :-)]

Comment Re:Actually a pretty good policy (Score 2) 137

The responses here are entirely predictable, but it's a legitimate concern. If China can shut off my router, that's one thing. If they can turn off the power grid, that's a different situation. It would be foolish to assume they and other countries are not at least trying to have that capability. I think having an audit of foreign made grid equipment is a good thing.

Comment Who gets there first? (Score 1) 16

Who cares? 21 km across is pretty big. At the scale that humans will ever realistically be able to build anything on the moon, we probably wouldn't even know the other country was there at all. No country is ever going to colonize the moon, or Mars. Or anywhere else. The most inhospitable place on Earth is better than everywhere else in the solar system, never mind the logistics.

I mean, the science is cool, but that's all it's ever going to be.

Comment All that is old is now new again (Score 3, Interesting) 24

The reason Google rose to dominance is that their algorithm accounted for trustworthiness. You didnâ(TM)t need to know the site that had your answer, Google knew it, and ranked it at the top of your results. This is basically asking you to manually do what Google historically did automatically, which is to vet websites that might contain answers to your queries. All so that they can inject LLMs into a process that does not need them. Yet one more reason Iâ(TM)m glad I ditched Google.

Slashdot Top Deals

To write good code is a worthy challenge, and a source of civilized delight. -- stolen and paraphrased from William Safire

Working...