Zvi Mowshowitz: belief

Transcript context

…You sound like a poser. Does the at what point do you move from pick your poison to global pause advocacy? Autumn again, the the problem is automation of AIR and D. Problem is a course of self improvement. If we do not have a course of self improvement, then we don't need to do that. We still need various different things well short of that because we're not do we are not engaging in what Dean Baugh calls moderate prudence. Right? We are not doing the least you can do. We are not taking ordinary sane civilizational precautions against just building this really dangerous, powerful thing, and doing a lot handing over a lot of the functions of our civilization to it in various degrees various ways. But the thing that causes me to want to pause or slow or, like, at least pace. Right? Like, we want to pace how fast we move through this thing actively is if it accelerates further than they already have, and we are facing large scale automation of AI r and d. Alternatively, you know, we do have to watch bio and cyber, and, like, if we reach a point where, like, no. Seriously, we're gonna wreck the world. Pretty straightforwardly and indirectly through misuse if we don't do something, then we have to worry about that. And, you know, again, like, it's really, really hard to stop the fast following. It's really, really hard to stop the distillation. It's really, really hard to stop the open version of it coming somewhat after you release it. And so if there's something that, like, you can't just beat by having a better version of it out there first. Right? If you can't beat it by preparing, and again, like, not in theory, but in practice, then you have to do something. But, like, I think the vast majority of the time that I would support actively support, like, an active pacing rule where you would, like, try to slow down the major lag. And obviously, like, you would try very, very hard to make this a coordinated thing amongst least all the major labs and ideally amongst, like, internationally and so on. Would be if we are on the verge of automation of AI r and d such that, like, you could see the end and there was a finite sum and, like, you know I mean, like, obviously, if next week is gonna see twice as many releases as this week, holy shit. Right? Like, the moment where you you don't know, like, you're usually going to predict what happens next. Right? That's the definition of the singularity, where things are accelerating really fast. And, like, this should not be some esoteric weird result. Like, if you look at the history of the universe, you see a finite sum. You see a very, very finite sum. Right? You see each stage of development taking an order of magnitude less than the previous one. ke, if you look at the history of the universe, you see a finite sum. You see a very, very finite sum. Right? You see each stage of development taking an order of magnitude less than the previous one. When you're on a planet, it's been around for four billion years, you know, with mammals that have been around for, you know, hundreds of millions of years, with reasonably intelligent things that have been around for a few million years, with agriculture and civilization that's been around for, you know, tens of thousands of years, with industry that's been around for hundreds of years, with a with AI and information aid that's been around for on the order of, you know, maybe fifty years or twenty years or ten years, you know, that you count. And LMs have been around for five, and, like, we're already at this point where we're seeing production that is many times what it was at the start because of these multipliers, these force multipliers on the people who are working on it by their own self reports.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.