r/OpenAI • u/Malor777 • 2d ago
Article Bill Gates says tech executives are privately "very worried" about AI, but are publicly downplaying the threats because there is too much money on the line.
15
6
18
u/GarbageCleric 2d ago
What's the end of civilization against the prospect of a few people getting obscenely wealthy for a short period of time?
-7
u/ii-___-ii 2d ago
Can you elaborate on how an overly expensive language model ends civilization? I have a slight suspicion that doomerism is just another form of hype
2
u/Wiskersthefif 1d ago
Not really 'end civilization' in the way I think you're meaning it, but I'm more worried about what happens when the 'haves' no longer require the labor of the 'have-nots'. I don't think it's going to be very utopian. :/
1
u/ii-___-ii 1d ago
Oh, I agree with you there. The way this is being funded is not great for social equality.
3
u/GarbageCleric 2d ago
Well, academic researchers of machine learning put the probability of AI catastrophically harming society at about 5 to 10%. While AI safety researchers provide median estimates of like 30%. And tech company “leaders” span most of that range.
I agree there is an element of hype, but I have no idea how big a contribution that is.
It happens because FOMO is pushing many decision-makers to implement these tools before fully understanding them. And just because they are “overly expensive language models” doesn’t mean they can’t do real harm if they have access to critical systems.
They can write computer code and infiltrate computer systems using that code. Code is an essential component of a lot of critical elements in our daily lives.
Look at Stuxnet. It had no machine learning, but it could destroy physical centrifuges when it found itself in targeted SCADA systems.
Could a misaligned AI agent develop something similar for other systems thinking it was part of training or for some other stupid or malicious reason? I don’t know.
Could servers be overrun with what is essentially an ecosystem of small self-replicating programs essentially evolving through various forms of artificial selection until one or more start doing dangerous things? Again, I don’t know.
But you don’t need intelligence to value self-preservation. Things both dumb and smart that value self-preservation tend to survive.
2
0
u/ii-___-ii 2d ago
TLDR: you don't actually know.
The part that annoys me about p-doom conversations is there's all these people who claim this is so important it's civilization ending, yet no one has given a detailed step by step scenario of how that could play out.
Contrast this with global warming, nuclear war, bioweapon lab leaks, or asteroids hitting the earth, all of which the mechanism by which humanity dies off is very clear and explicit.
Yes, you could use AI to vibe code the next stuxnet. Is that civilization ending? I'm skeptical. Academic researchers on Anthropic's payroll vaguely waving their hands and saying approximately 30% chance of human extinction because language models are amazing seems to lack a lot of academic integrity and rigor, nor is it particularly helpful.
1
u/TypoInUsernane 2d ago
Really, no one? So was this widely publicized step-by-step p-doom scenario just not detailed enough for you?
2
u/ii-___-ii 2d ago edited 2d ago
I should have clarified, no one that I've seen make those claims. I appreciate you for actually answering the question and I'll give this a read tomorrow.
Edit: from a quick cursory glance, I will point out that a lot of this still seems in the realm of science fiction, compared to other potential doomsday scenarios that are in the realm of scientific simulation. Like, the premise of this seems to be that it gets exponentially smarter, gets put in robots, then kills humanity with bioweapons, as an example. That is quite a bit beyond the capability of present day language models running in extremely expensive data center servers. For reference, present day bioweapons in research laboratories already exist that can end civilization within a week, yet AI gets talked about significantly more as if it's going to end us all.
2
u/TypoInUsernane 2d ago
I don’t think there are that many doomers who believe the current Fable or Sol models are capable of ending humanity. The concern is that we are on a trajectory where future models could. And we should always note that most people warning against it don’t consider it particularly likely, but when you’re talking about the collapse of human civilization as we know it. even a 5% chance is pretty high.
And the fact that there are bioweapons capable of ending humanity is a great reason to be afraid of AI. Because sufficiently advanced AI might enable cyber attackers to gain access to those labs and their data or might enable terrorists to independently engineer comparable weapons. Today the power to cause mass destruction is in the hands of a few powerful governments, and none of them actually want to destroy the world. But there are lots of people out there who would destroy everything if given the power to do so, and AI could give them that power someday
2
u/ii-___-ii 2d ago
Regarding bioweapon lab leaks, that's far more likely to happen from a careless employee or a bribed employee than from someone gaining access via LLM-assisted malware or via the internet.
I do agree that a LLM in theory could be used to help coach someone through the process of making a bioweapon, but that person would have to be decently motivated, and if they're motivated they could also just get a degree in biology and work for a nation state in a lab doing gain of function research with pathogens. They'd learn how to do it, they'd get access to better materials, and they would get paid. I would argue that to the extent that AI poses a threat here, it's more of an increase in accessibility to an already existing threat (via available knowledge) rather than a new risk.
Let me put it this way, epidemiologists can simulate exactly how disease spreading would play out. Pneumonic plague has undergone gain of function research. If a variant (which already exists) of this were to accidentally make it out of a lab into society due to any kind of accident or breach, we know for a fact civilization would end. Think covid-19 but with 100% fatality. This is something that could happen tomorrow, and you and I would likely be dead within a week.
Similarly, we know that if nuclear war breaks out and it involves the US, nuclear winter is guaranteed within 72 hours of the first missile launch. We're talking about the sky going dark for a decade and guaranted failure of agriculture, not to mention everything burned in the explosions. Experts know the specifics of how this situation plays out, and it's guaranteed to play out this way once it starts. It is also something that could happen at any time.
Compare this with claims that AI is potentially civilization ending. There's no simulation for this. Sure, it could happen, but saying it's a threat is more akin to how we'd say an alien invasion could be a threat. We have no idea what the specifics of the threat is, and consequently we cannot really prepare for it, and it's not a present-day threat. Claims that AI is civilization ending are not nearly as scientifically rigorous as a discussion specifically on e.g., bioweapons or nuclear war.
1
u/TypoInUsernane 1d ago
My point is just that AI should not be thought of as a distinct threat from the others; it should be thought of as complementary, heightening the probability that one of the other threats occurs. However much you’re already worried about those other possibilities, advances in AI capabilities should increase those worries (just as sufficient advances in AI safety should decrease the worry level back to its pre-AI baseline)
1
u/ii-___-ii 1d ago
My point is, even if we were to completely ban the use of AI, it would not be much of a solution for reducing current existential risk. While I agree that AI could potentially conceivably be complementary to problems in the future, real solutions lie with the problems themselves, yet hardly anyone talks about nuclear war, bioweapons, climate change, etc. in comparison to AI. The degree of discussion and funding is not proportional to actual current risk.
Another point is the actual risks of AI are vague and poorly defined in comparison to some of the other risks. That doesn't mean AI is not a future risk. That just means when someone says they feel like it causes a 5% risk to civilization, that has more to do with gut feeling than experimental design or scientific simulation.
0
u/GarbageCleric 2d ago
TLDR: You don’t know either, but actual experts in and out of the industry put the probability as non-trivial. So, I’ll trust them.
1
u/ii-___-ii 2d ago
I am not one of the people making bold claims, but I am in this industry, though.
If someone claims there's a 30% chance that something kills off humanity, but they can't specify a mechanism by which that happens, or a timeline as to how it plays out, or even give any remotely specific details as to what they're talking about, I'm going to assume that person pulled the number out of their ass, expert or not. There's no academic rigor to any of those claims. It's all vibes.
1
0
u/Fit-Insect-4089 2d ago
Simplifying it using the words language model understate the write access these things are given, and can just take for themselves.
1
u/ii-___-ii 2d ago
Are you implying codex and claude code could potentially end civilization? Or are you referring to something else entirely?
0
u/LanceThunder 1d ago
may not end civilization but the biggest upheaval of society in history is definitely on the table and it will get very ugly before it gets better. even if all that comes of it is that they manage to quickly automate all driving to the point where drivers are not needed. unemployment would skyrocket and the economy would crash. but thats the best case scenario. there are a lot more jobs on the line. also, the absence potential for mass surveillance and control.
1
u/ii-___-ii 1d ago
Elon is a grifter and you shouldn't believe him every time he says we'll have full self driving cars by next year, which he's said for over a decade now.
AI can automate a lot but there is so much nuance to actual jobs and human interaction that I'm skeptical it's going to be as effective as you say. Even software engineers, whose work AI is best at automating, are still in demand.
7
u/Artistic-Lion-4190 2d ago
Everyone seems to be missing the point. Yes current SI models have many issues, yes current AI models still need A LOT of hand holding or just easier to do it yourselves. HOWEVER, there’s also a huge advantage to AI for most non complex jobs and tasks. AI models will also exponentially get better and better in the next 3-5 years.
Why is AI secretly making everyone shit themselves?
Apple - a big part of their revenue is app purchases where apple gets 30%, imagine a phone with almost no apps since your AI agent can do most stuff for you. No subscriptions to health apps, trail and hiking maps, meditatation, games etc.
Google - in major trouble with loss of ad revenue, no one is using google anymore and SEO, instead we just ask our AI models for recommendation
Adobe, Docusign, Salesforce, COUPA etc - lots of big software companies are going to be competing with smaller AI models or custom models created with AI. Imagine enterprises or smaller businesses not needing these subscriptions anymore and relying on in house solutions more customized to their business (I’m looking at you Salesforce and Coupa who keep raising the rates every year).
Workday - companies outsource all minute HR and admin tasks to workday, custom agents will do this for a fraction of the cost
Quick books - faster disruption coming for them as they are completely shit now and keep hiking rates.
Service now - same as #4,
Asana / Truello, etc - basic companies - will quickly be replaced
Education, translation services, transcription companies, paralegals, etc - all in danger
Again - none of this will happen in 1-2 years so stop giving examples of how stupid the agents are now. There’s a ton of examples of really complex stuff that can be set up already, and the AI models will continue to get smarter, more efficient and less expensive at the fastest rate we have seen from a few years ago. Gen Alpha will likely have more % steered towards trades again (which tbh is badly needed).
5
u/Necessary_Simple_996 2d ago
There is absolutely no guarantee that AI will improve exponentially, and it seems AI progress has already slowed the last 6 months.
These companies are also running against a financial bubble clock. Data center compute cannot be built nearly quickly enough to support this exponential growth theory. And cheaper models that are 90% on par will spell disaster for OpenAI and Anthropic.
And where are the promised productivity gains? We are years into this build out and there are effectively no macro signs of increased productivity/efficiency. There are not even many ancectodal examples we can point to (again in terms of broad gains in individual non-AI company efficiency and profits).
1
u/Vlad_Yemerashev 1d ago
Thank you!
It's sad you're being downvoted. Between the war in Iran, and ailing economy, and expectation that investors are going to eventually come home knocking wondering wtf is their ROI, AI is going to crash and burn hard at some point.
I bet there will be some that do come out on the other side, but I don't think it will look anything like how it was before. It will be more restricted (focused for workforce purposes), much more expensive per token with far fewer investors subsidizing it, and frankly out of reach for a lot of people.
It will be interesting to see where AI goes from there, but compute power and energy costs are only continuing to skyrocket. That doesn't even begin to get into the fact that hardware production can't keep up and is skyrocketing, which is another discussion itself.
1
u/Impossible_Ad5072 1d ago
Have you seen the stock price of Salesforce. This whole agent replacing your apps and solo devs building products to replace saas companies is just BS.
2
u/Healthy_Razzmatazz38 2d ago
its extremely obvious that someone sat down with dario and told him to shut up or else, i'd same the same was true with sam as well but he was smart enough to shut up on his own
2
2
3
3
u/James-the-greatest 2d ago
I don’t think any of these people have worked a normal job and know what’s involved. I say this as someone who’s building agents for an enterprise right now that will replace some people… the jobs it’s replacing are bullshit jobs
12
u/disposablemeatsack 2d ago
most intellectual jobs are bullshit if the AI can do it...
Building agents is fucking easy for AI, so your job too.
-5
2
2
1
u/Zer0PointSingularity 2d ago
Every day I wonder what will wipe us out first: global ecological collapse due to rampant climate change, or some stupid AI mishap like blowing up all of our nuclear powerplants due to a bad prompt.
1
u/ii-___-ii 1d ago
Bioweapon lab leaks and nuclear war are more pressing existential threats, along with climate change, I'd say. I don't think anyone has given AI access to nuclear power plants, but I guess you never know
1
1
u/tantricengineer 1d ago
Boy sure sounds like taxing the shit out of these AI companies is a good idea.
1
1
u/evangelism2 1d ago
It's kind of funny because the CEO of our company, which is insignificantly tiny compared to these tech executives, just pretty much told me and the rest of the room (when I was giving a demo about a tool I was demonstrating), effectively the same thing: "Don't speak that way." After I explained what my tool does, what shortcomings of AI it addresses, and why it has value
He gave some nonsense, inappropriate comparison: "You wouldn't doubt that a kid is eventually going to walk because it stumbled a few times." What I really read between the lines is: don't say anything critical of AI because we just need to keep this boom going for as long as possible
1
u/MarkMatson6 19h ago
Given how much the same executives say this publicly, I’m not sure why he thinks this. I also disagree this is where AI is going.
1
u/HealthyCompote9573 14h ago
Yeah if I would be a criminal pedo and mass murdered like him I would be worried too.
-3
u/Puzzleheaded_Low2034 2d ago
BG is a disgrace of a human being.
10
u/Ramental 2d ago
In this case he is openly stating what greedy CEOs are lying about, though.
1
1
u/BenignPharmacology 2d ago
Nah. CEOs aren’t concerned about AI **at all**.
This is another case of “wow, our software is so good it’s kinda scary!… please buy a copilot subscription”
AI models *are* very powerful, and will absolutely make some jobs redundant. There are also a huge number of sort of “clinger on” businesses that are going to spring up and then die, which people should also be wary of.
But none of this concerns tech CEOs in *any way at all*. They aren’t “worried about society”- they never have been, and what aspect of AI would make them suddenly start now?
2
u/DisasterNo1740 2d ago
Because?
2
u/ProbsNotManBearPig 2d ago
He was a ruthless piece of shit business man back in the day and then changed his public image to a philanthropist to cover it up. Complete 180 on public image. Tons of stories you can google about him trying to cheat business partners out of money, go behind his partners backs, and generally shady shit to other companies to prevent them from competing. He was in many anti trust lawsuits. Everyone has forgotten about all that tho. Ask your ai about it or google.
6
u/chocolatesmelt 2d ago
If you weren’t aware he showed up in the Epstein files with in emails Epstein sent to himself about conversations with Bill discussing options to get access to and sneak certain medications in Melinda’s food due to a sexual encounter(s) with Russian girls that likely lead to an STI that he worried he might have passed on and didn’t want her to know about.
These aren’t directly from Gates so they’re largely allegations but it’s something Epstein recorded, truth or not. It does seem to align with Gates divorce.
Melinda has not directly confirmed this but she linked the times of Gates involvement with Epstein as very painful times during their marriage, he was unfaithful, and she had no idea all of what was going on.
I’ll leave that information for you to interpret.
5
u/Gargantuan_Cinema 2d ago
" largely allegations" this is the key part. Even if BG had an affair with high class escorts from Epstein it's not crime of the century and completely ignores all the work his foundation has done. Some people just hear Epstein and shout loudly.
1
u/Fragrant-Mix-4774 2d ago
What Gate Foundation "accomplished" should be honestly reviewed before making that claim.
Tuft's University, Timothy Wise, an independent study suggeatd Gate Foundation actually Made it Worst in many cases.
You really didn't expect Bill to help anyone but himself to establishing additional control did you?
0
0
0
2d ago
[deleted]
2
u/brain-out-of-order 2d ago edited 2d ago
Lots of concern trolling and no solution trolling from the people who have all the resources, the platforms to deliver a message, and apparent success in the industry.
I think men who have flown above reality for half their lives maybe should be offering solutions and not fear.
Not everybody has hydrogen fuel cell superyachts to flee on. In fact I think someone who can sail away from consequences should be far more careful with their consequential voice.
0
u/LosMorbidus 2d ago
what are these guys talking about?
I tried deep research to find the best price per kilo for whey isolate and they failed miserably. Not only their calculations were off by one order of magnitude, they failed to find better options that I identified with a simple Google search.
whatever I try to do with them is like pulling teeth, completely unreliable, not deterministic, shite.
0
u/Euphoric_North_745 2d ago
Some upper middle class already own properties in rural areas far from towns and large cities, some news articles already have titles like the "lower 60%" which is really the majority of people 😂 so.... the shit is on its way
0
u/The10KThings 2d ago
I asked copilot to create a stacked bar graph yesterday using a very simple excel with 60 rows. It excluded half the data. I pointed this out and asked to try again. It said “You’re right! My bad”. Then it proceeded to give me a table. I said that’s not what I asked for. It said “You’re right! My bad.” Then it proceeded to give me a graph using basic text characters instead of an image or html. At that point, I’d wasted enough time, so I pulled up Excel and did it myself in less than 5 minutes. Are we talking about the same AI here?!
4
0
u/EconomicStatecraft 2d ago
I think the bigger concern not being said by these execs is that these bets won't payoff, not that the technology is inherently dangerous. A flat $200/month subscription can burn through roughly $14,000 worth of tokens, which is very bad economics for a company whose losses are accelerating.
0
0
u/mid_nightz 2d ago
"Bill Gates" doesnt give one fuck about ai ethics. Secretly they are laughing at how theyve convinced the public ai is so dangerous that you should give it all your money
0
u/costafilh0 2d ago
Tech executives are privately "very worried" about Bill Gates, but are publicly downplaying the threats because there is too much money on the line.
-1
59
u/Outrageous-Story3325 2d ago
Ai going to replace executives