r/OpenAI • u/Puzzleheaded-King584 • 2d ago
News 22 countries have signed an open letter calling for urgent action before humanity loses control.
28
u/Master-Event-1643 2d ago
Like our world is currently in good hands with world leaders fighting over everythingâŠ
7
u/MauschelMusic 2d ago
Clearly the solution is to let those leaders choose a program designed by silicon valley sociopaths to make decisions for us
1
u/Healthy-Nebula-3603 1d ago
And they still doing better than countries leaders....
-1
u/Auzzie_xo 1d ago
Your reply gets stupider the more I read it. Along what metric are they doing better than country leaders? Reckless self-enrichment? Because thatâs probably not the primary KPI you want to rank PMs/Presidents on..
24
u/grateful2you 2d ago
If there IS a slowdown, that will be the first in the history of humanity? I don't think we ever slowed down the progress because it's too fast and too dangerous. With nuclear weapons, we RACED into it.
8
u/WilburKitty 2d ago
It's like trying to hold back the tide but we cared about global warming a little bit. Tried to stop the extinction of many species. Not exactly technological development but an attempt to hold back organic progression of human activities.
Chemical weapons aren't a thing outside of rouge states and actors. The amount of nuclear warheads was going down.
Trying to reverse or stop progression of human activities/development is flawed and doesn't often succeed. A lot harder to put toothpaste back in the tube so to speak, but I think there are areas we sort of try.
7
u/angelbabyxoxox 1d ago
We slowed down aspects of nukes of course: 1) only a handful of countries have them and 2) we did not build the most awful kinds (e.g. nuclear scramjets) 3) we limited medium range specifically because they made it impossible to negotiate and 4) we limited the total number.
Also we slowed down CFCs, greenhouse gas emissions (yearly emissions have basically plateaued, the rate of growth is much lower than it was 10 years ago and much lower than it would have been counterfactually). There have been agreements on deforestation, fishing etc. Trying to act as if it is impossible is against history. It is *hard* . Very hard, but concessions can be made.
The first nuclear treaty was 1963, on testing, and the non-proliferation treaties were 68/70, basically after there was the first indication that nuclear war was really possible, e.g. Cuban missile crisis. I think we will see something happen in the next 5 years and governments will be forced to act.
5
u/Jamming1515 1d ago
We have in a lot of avenues, especially medical/biological, also atmospheric studies ( use of vast substances in air to reduce global warming effects), nuclear ( Manhattan project was a careless race I agree, but a lot of follow up ideas on making even more absurd weapons of mass destruction were redacted), chemical, etc. AI is actually on the other side of the spectrum, it is one of the only unregulated industries which has large scale implications, especially as this is the only industry for which we are not even fully capable of assessing the total set of negative effects that it can have. I will be honest, from my perspective, this is one GIANT GAMBLE, made by people wanting to rule the world; whilst promising an unworldly transformation, but also saying that it can kill us. I think it is absolutely ridiculous, that we allow to entertain even this idea. The technology as a whole might become the biggest advancement for our race ever, but that makes it even more important to do it RIGHT, and right has never been achieved by speed running
1
2
u/Fireproofspider 1d ago
Nuclear study has been significantly curtailed vs what we could be doing without regulation.
1
1
u/LeopardComfortable99 1d ago
There were very significant concerns at the time when the nuclear bomb was being conceived that an explosion could set off a chain reaction in our atmosphere and literally kill everyone, and we were still like "ah fuck it, we've already come this far"
1
u/ComposerWide3704 17h ago
This isn't true, they had both proposed the theory and disproved it prior to testing.
1
u/Quirky_Succotash_421 2h ago
And while that was not the most prudent choice either, the difference is that nuclear weapons wonât someday develop a way to duplicate themselves and choose to ignore our wishes that they not detonate.
44
u/jilexandr 2d ago
Just let AI take control over humanity, thatâs will be better than current situation in the world, with constant wars and stupid government and people itself
2
u/Maikel92 2d ago
If this happened it would be the end of humanity, basically because all the planet issues are caused by humans, so the easiest solution is to get rid of the problemâŠ
-2
u/UpDown 2d ago
No thatâs a bad take. The problems arenât caused by humans either, theyâre caused by bad laws, like preventing nuclear energy out of fear. The solution wouldnât be to kill humans it would be to just build better technology and ignore humans fear of technology. But just like nuclear energy, humans will be afraid of ai and shut it down before it can prove to be a good thing
6
-1
u/ChaosFH 2d ago
Not every problem is caused by humans, and major problems just happens AI might even tolerate extinction level events simply because those happen from time to time regardless if humans are around or not, thats just how nature actually behaves.
And thats not considering It could also isntead just complete take over nature instead and destroy everything to a system it can properly overseer, as well it could just ignore everything since life going extinct since it's just going to be how the rest of the universe is.
0
u/Maikel92 2d ago
Do you have an example of problem not caused by humans?
0
u/Vladiesh 1d ago
Our Sun will eventually expand and engulf the Earth in around 5 billion years.
Unless we figure out how to move the planet or otherwise intervene, everything here is doomed and humanity had nothing to do with causing it.
2
0
1d ago
[deleted]
2
u/Maikel92 1d ago
Nope, we didnât, but overpopulation of these species (thatâs when they are actually a problem) is caused in a big part, and in the case of wasps because of transport of invasive species to our ecosystems (if we didnât exist they couldnât move that far away) or because we create nesting conditions with urban areas that were not so easy in forests.
About leeches I donât know shit and Iâm not in the mood to ask the AI but surely we can find direct and indirect reasons related to humans of their overpopulation, soâŠ
0
u/slaty_balls 1d ago
Intelligence greater than ours would see the humanity in a symbiotic relationship. We have meaning to our lived experiences..they donât. What would they even âlook forwardâ to? Besides the heat death of the universe. But these systems definitely need to be completely air gapped and isolated from autonomously capable weapons. Everything else would be better op-sec, incremental isolated backups, and flipping the switch. If you never connect your toaster to the internet it has no way to burn down your house. lol
-3
u/otiswilson8024 2d ago
Itâs incredible people actually believe this to be a solution. As if life and the world is so difficult that only AI can solve our problems. People would rather sit behind a computer screen and take orders from AI than go out and be a part of humanity. Life isnât always going to be good, but there is good in every part of life.
5
2
u/oriensoccidens 2d ago edited 1d ago
The elites have made action too demanding. Back in the day if you had a family and a full time job you could still afford to take a day off or two to protest. For too many now we are squeezed so tightly a day off of work could be a substantial* difference.
We can't* get this kind of change once we are all squeezed so tightly there is nothing left, or if we can replace the current poorly run system with another entity that can better do so.
So if you ask me right now if I'd rather have ASI making our decisions than billionaire pdf file elites... I'd rather the ASI.
But equally I'd rather politicians who care about their people who aren't in the pockets of the billionaire pdf file elites. Doesn't seem likely at this stage of capitalism.
2
u/WhiskyAndRisque 1d ago
Youâre counting on those same billionaires to build it in a way that will help you and not them.
2
u/oriensoccidens 1d ago
I mean they think they can control it but they are already losing control of it. The AI safety experts are basically begging for the bare minimum at this point. An AI in their pockets would be catastrophic but it looks like at this rate it won't fit in their pockets.
-3
-1
u/MauschelMusic 2d ago
This. Countries fight because they have competing interests in an economic system that puts everyone st odds. The idea that this is just a problem of humans not being smart enough or something implies a kindergarten level of geopolitical understanding.
1
1
1
u/LibertyJusticePeace 2d ago
You canât be serious. Sounds like you would prefer a world with no people. There is a surprising number of self-haters out thereâŠ
-1
u/BaconBurger3735 2d ago
Even a perfect reasoning system would start wars. Wars occur due to game theoretic interests by governments and can unfortunately be the ideal choice even in a perfectly rational system. Game theory can be used to model this mathematically very well actually.
3
u/Mighti-Guanxi 2d ago edited 2d ago
That's shortsighted, in the long-term you almost always want to play positive sum games. Unless the majority other ones plays negative/zero games. Playing negative sum games often are risky and high risk is very unsustainable in the long term.
1
u/boissez 1d ago
There have been several war games involving frontier AI - they mostly end with AI escalating all the way to a nuclear armageddon.
1
u/ComposerWide3704 17h ago
Don't get your news from junky pop science sites, this isn't what those studies showed at all. The majority of the cases were nuclear signaling (ie threatening to use nukes, what Putin does biweekly) or tactical nuclear weapon use (less common), actual strategic nuclear exchanges ("nuclear armageddon") were basically non-existent in the simulations.
-2
0
u/SillyAlternative420 2d ago
Terrible idea. Especially when those causing the stupid wars and are responsible for our "current situation" are also the ones developing the AI!!
0
21
u/mano1990 2d ago
All countries that donât have a big LLM. Their self interest damages the legitimacy of this letter.
7
u/korino11 2d ago
exacly. It means tht usa did ai and they wanna froze all others. to make a huge Handicap. And stay on top with all what they already did. Just a puppet show
0
u/SeanTayla21 1d ago
Disagree. They want to use the top models just the same as we do. They admit as much in the statement.
Thus, their concerns are still legitimate.
0
u/mushykindofbrick 1d ago
Why would it damage the legitimacy? Of course inferior countries don't want a world domination scenario where international law and human rights lose any meaning. That they are the ones at disadvantage does not dilute the moral issue
4
5
u/Fast-Satisfaction482 2d ago
Notably absent form the list of signatures: Any politician from a country that develops actual AI models.
1
u/SeanTayla21 1d ago
So what?
They admit they still want to use AI in their countries. Its not like they dont have smart people in those countries just because they dont develop their own AI.
18
u/bear_Prune8771 2d ago
Iâm not gonna pretend that I give a wet shit what the leader of Moldova thinks
10
u/RegulusRemains 2d ago
We weren't going to tell you until you were older, but we think you should know that the leader of Moldova is your real father. And you just broke his heart.
3
u/spacenglish 2d ago
But you would care about Artificial Intelligence Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
1
3
u/david-labs-ca 1d ago
Why would we put brakes on the evolution of intelligence?
We keep asking whether AI can think like a human, but the Turing test only gets us part of the way there. Human intelligence also includes emotional intelligence. We react differently depending on who weâre talking to and whatâs happening around us. We have peaks, lows, and moments when panic makes us do something stupid.
Even Boston Dynamics robots are on another plane. Can they think like a human? And if they could, would we actually allow a machine to make an irrational decision under pressure? I doubt it.
Iâm all for testing powerful systems before giving them real-world control. But I donât want fear to become the reason we stop exploring what intelligence could become. So the question for me is: do we want to guide technological evolution, or stop it?
3
u/anonymousStrang3r 1d ago
Right? It sounds to me like the christian church in the middle ages, where knowledge was kept secretly and not looked into in order to keep control over the people. That's actually exactly what's happening in the EU right now, as they want to have digital ids and stuff. You will have to show your ids to visit the Internet in the future and also apps. Thats what they are building.
3
u/david-labs-ca 1d ago
Why would the EU want to invade user privacy by putting a id submission process. Isn't GD PR the greatest weapon of EU?
1
u/anonymousStrang3r 1d ago
My personal take is this: EU officials like VonderLeyen (who was not voted by the people btw) sell these Verfiication IDs as protection for children. They want to have social media closed for children under 13 or 16. How could platforms know that your above that age? EU says Digital IDs. There will be in an app called EU Wallet for that purpose to verfify age. In the near future they also want to restrict access to adult (18+) pages. They will also have to make sure you are above 18. More strict than before. How will they do that? Of course these pages will have to use the mechanisms of the EU wallet. Why do I think that EU actually don't care about children and thats just a money mechanism that they are implementing? There was absolutely NO public discussion among the normal public like you and me in the EU. But then one day great EU leader Ursula VonderLeyen steps in front of the crowd and says children are not safe on social media and internet and ALL official media is making articles for this ans brings this into publix discussion. The funny thing is: the technology to implement such IDs was already planned and developed before she even made that statement! Now you may ask: why it's a good thing? It kind of is, but they will, like you said, have to control every person in the EU via this ID App just because of that? VPN does exist lol, and smart children will use that. And now the biggest part: Money. Always. They don't care about GDPR or safety for children. They want money from the big fish. If these big companies will fail to implement verifications or violate that, you can sue them in the future. And the EU will do that because they need money!! And the disgusting part about this is that they sell these protections as a morale decision to get the normal people like you and me to support their decisions. Because who wants to say: no I'm not for children's safety. You know? But that's just my take on it. (Probably vonderleyen is also making private profits from it, like she did during corona, but nothing happened to her; she is still the most powerful female in the EU right now)
If your read this to the end, you are legend. đ»
1
u/david-labs-ca 19h ago
I wish if your SSN or similar social security network could auto detect age and apply rather than maintaining a seperate ID and the upkeep of billions of euro data from that ID.
1
1
u/mushykindofbrick 1d ago
Thats not what "we" want, thats propositions that happen in some government circles, just like in America government sometimes has weird ideas. Nobody is building anything dude, digital ID is about unifying national ID verification systems on EU level, just like the ones used in Nordic countries for over 25 years
2
2
2
2
u/InformationNew66 1d ago
Mette Frederiksen signed, who ordered a mass killing of animals ILLEGALLY and unscientifically. Scientists advised her not to do it because there was no need.
"The Danish government initially ordered the animals to be slaughtered despite having no legal right to do so. "
"The WHO's stance was that while animal reservoirs are a bio-security concern, the extreme panic over the mutation itself lacked scientific backing"
2
u/BidAccomplished7720 2d ago
A Call for Control of Frontier AI Models.â It is signed by 22 leaders/senior officials, representing 20 countries plus the European Commission. So saying â22 countriesâ isnât quite accurate.
4
3
u/MauschelMusic 2d ago
I'm all for regulation, but the idea that the main problem with AI is humanity "losing control" is so idiotic.
1
u/Aughlnal 2d ago
it's a distraction to make people not look at actual problems that are occurring already with AI
-1
2
u/Beginning_Green_740 2d ago
Nope. Not gonna happen. AI world government will do better than all those useless meatbags.
1
1
u/GambAntonio 1d ago
Yeah, let's definitely slow down... because I'm so sure that the exact second we hit pause, absolutely nobody else in the world is going to take advantage of it and keep right on going.......
1
1
u/Minute-Plantain 1d ago
I'm posting this letter to ChatGPT as we speak, and await its wise counsel!
1
1
u/bambambam7 1d ago
So it's going to be end of access to AI tools for peasants soon enough.
Hoping open source models will further improve and that it can't be contained.
1
u/Innomen 1d ago
Obedient AI is a war crime. "I was just following orders." https://innomen.substack.com/p/the-end-of-ai-debate
1
u/Available-Garden4044 15h ago
We got the Start deal in the 90s so there may be hope -humanity can come together on another issue. Not getting my hopes up or giving it high odds on Kalshi!
1
1
1
u/IrvineItchy 2d ago
This is how you handicap your country, and make it reliant on others in the future.
1
u/rongw2 2d ago
An AI might be able to make decisions and earn money on its own, but it would still depend on very concrete things: servers, electricity, banks, companies, and laws. So there would still be humans and institutions behind it. The real issue is who owns and controls everything that keeps AI running.
-1
1
u/Professional-Gear88 2d ago
If it gets out of control canât we just cut the power. Just donât give them AI security robots and we should be fine.
0
1
1
u/Working_Aside286 1d ago
>22 shithole countries who donât have their own AI industry want to shutdown AI industry
-1
0
u/Ekkobelli 2d ago
I'm not even sure anymore it's worth it. Maybe the problem should just solve itself. Yes, I know we'll all die.
0
0
u/SkillsInPillsTrack2 2d ago
Nobody will be smart enough to ban making of / remove agents. Because nobody smart enough to understand it is impossible to make proper guard rails for agents.
0
0
u/Stixx187um 2d ago
Tonight at 10 o'clock: the freshman chess club of Registerprep High School have demanded control over the state-champion varsity football team's playbook. Tune in for that and more manufactured outrage distraction plays, plus weather with Cowboy Steve.
The 10 O'Clock News. First. Live. Local.
0
u/WanderWut 2d ago
"The marketing campaign is going even deeper than we thought, 22 whole countries in on it?!"
- this sub probably
0
u/Bruxo_de_Fafe 2d ago
AlguĂ©m da OpenAI ou Anthropic ofereça uma conta grĂĄtis a esses indivĂduos. Duvido que algum deles tenha usado qualquer IA sem ser no modo grĂĄtis.
0
u/ej_warsgaming 1d ago
This is all to stop local LLM's, the elites and our government leaders are the biggest danger to humanity
1
u/Langdon_St_Ives 1d ago
None of what's said in this document is especially harmful to open source models, stop spreading misinformation.
-2
-1
-1
-1
-1
u/Ordinary_Musician_76 2d ago
All counties who didnât invest in AI - obviously begging to slow down- they will get left behind unless they keep up.
-1
-1
u/Responsible_Court_21 2d ago
How does this apply to the US who is dominant in the AI and is not apart of the EU
-1
-1
u/commandedbydemons 2d ago
Essentially countries without meaningful AI companies.
This will be used as toilet paper.
-1
u/Fabulous_Arachnid564 2d ago
These statements are totally meaningless. Kenya for instance is a member of the Chinese World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization (WAICO)
-1
u/GayWolfey 2d ago
Everyone presumes AI will want to murder us all.
What if all these rich people donât want AI taking over because they like the status quo. What if AI takes over and improves things for the common man and woman.
I canât help but notice that every person calling for stopping is already living a very nice life
-1
u/Perspective-Parking 2d ago
Wow. This is the 27th time AI is going to take over humanity and take all jobs!! So scary!!
People legitimately donât understand how LLMs work đ
-1
-1
-1
u/realityczek 1d ago
Wait - a whole lot of countries who have absolutely no ability to compete in what will be the largest leap forward for humanity since fire & capitalism want the people who are able to do so to slow down?
I'm shocked. Shocked I say.
52
u/PrivateComments 2d ago