> What we do is not governed by what China may or may not do.
Yes it is... Where the hell would you get the impression we don't change how we govern and invest based on what China does, is doing, or might be doing? Do you really think nations don't adjust their behavior and laws based on other counties real or perceived? I can't imagine you're that ignorant.
> If you want want to beat that, opposing responsible AI won’t do it.
I could be wrong; maybe what China does with its AI developments will significantly and drastically alter the current startup status quo for AI startups.
Maybe the laws around AI will drastically impact the ability of startups to compete with foreign competitors.
…but I can’t see that being likely.
It seems to me that restricting chip technology has a much much more significant impact, along with a raft of other measures which are already in place.
All I can see when I look closely at arguments from people saying this kind of stuff is people who want to make deep fakes, steal art and generate porn bots crying about it, and saying it not fair other people (eg. Japan, where this has been ruled legal, China for who knows what reason, mostly ignorance) are allowed to do it.
I’m not sympathetic.
I don’t believe that makes any difference to the progress on AGI.
I don’t care if China out competes other countries on porn bots (I don’t think they will; they have a very strict set of rules around this stuff… but I’ll be generous and include Japan which probably will).
You want the US to get AGI first?
Well, explain specifically how you imagine open source (shared with the world) models, and open code sharing vs. everything being locked away in a Google/Meta sandbox helps?
Are you sure you’re arguing for the right side here? Shouldn’t you be arguing that the models should be secret so China can’t get them?
Or are you just randomly waving your arms in the air about China without having read the original article?
What are you even arguing for? Laws are bad… but sharing with China is also bad… but having rules about what you do is bad… but China will do it anyway… but fear mongering and locking models away in big corporations behind apis is bad… but China… or something…
> It seems to me that restricting chip technology has a much much more significant impact, along with a raft of other measures which are already in place.
Restricting chip technology is useless and the people proposing it are foolish. Computer chips are generic technology and AI things benefit from parallelism. The only difference between faster chips and more slower chips is how much power they use, so the only thing you get from restricting access to chips is more climate change.
> All I can see when I look closely at arguments from people saying this kind of stuff is people who want to make deep fakes, steal art and generate porn bots crying about it, and saying it not fair other people (eg. Japan, where this has been ruled legal, China for who knows what reason, mostly ignorance) are allowed to do it.
The problem is not that people won't be able to make porn bots. They will make porn bots regardless, I assure you. The problem is that the people who want to control everything want to control everything.
You can't have a model with boobs in it because that's naughty, so we need a censorship apparatus to prevent that. And it should also prevent racism, somehow, even though nobody actually agrees how to accomplish that. And it can't emit foreign propaganda, defined as whatever politicians don't like. And now that it has been centralized into a handful of megacorps, they can influence how it operates to their own ends and no one else can make one that works against them.
Now that you've nerfed the thing, it's worse at honest work. It designs uncomfortable apparel because it doesn't understand what boobs are. You ask it how something would be perceived by someone in a particular culture and it refuses to answer, or lies to you because of what the answer would be. You try to get it to build a competing technology to the company that operates the thing and all it will do is tell you to use theirs. You ask it a question about the implications of some policy and its answer is required to comply with specific politics.
> Well, explain specifically how you imagine open source (shared with the world) models, and open code sharing vs. everything being locked away in a Google/Meta sandbox helps?
To improve it you can be anyone anywhere vs. to improve it you have to work for a specific company that only employs <1% of the people who might have something to contribute. To improve it you don't need the permission of someone with a conflict of interest.
> Are you sure you’re arguing for the right side here? Shouldn’t you be arguing that the models should be secret so China can’t get them?
China is a major country. It will get them. The only question is if you will get them, in addition to China and Microsoft. And to realize the importance of this, all you have to ask is if all of your interests are perfectly aligned with those of China and Microsoft.
Yes it is... Where the hell would you get the impression we don't change how we govern and invest based on what China does, is doing, or might be doing? Do you really think nations don't adjust their behavior and laws based on other counties real or perceived? I can't imagine you're that ignorant.
> If you want want to beat that, opposing responsible AI won’t do it.
Not opposing it guarantees you lose though.