logoalt Hacker News

nradov • yesterday at 1:03 AM • 3 replies • view on HN

That's merely an assertion unsupported by any reliable evidence, not an actual argument. In short you're just making shit up.


Replies

jswelker • yesterday at 1:46 AM

Well that's the nature of trying to prevent a thing that hasn't happened yet right? What would be reliable evidence except that terrorists already used AI to help build a bioweapon? I'm sure before 9/11 talking about terrorists using commercial airplanes as makeshift missiles seemed like scaremongering too.

I see zero technical reasons why it could not be done, so being concerned about prevention seems pretty reasonable. I'm not saying AI uses robotic arms to build a bioweapon unassisted or something, just that it dramatically empowers bad actors enough to make them capable of things they previously were not.

literalAardvark • yesterday at 8:50 AM

It's quite hard to measure until a wet lab gets behind the filter access to benchmark it.

But if you extrapolate from the ability it has in fields that aren't too strictly filtered, it looks pretty scary.

There are arguments against doing that but at first glance it seems like we just don't really know, and we likely won't: if governments decide they're interested in AI gain of function capabilities they won't be broadcasting that or allowing public benchmarks.

➕ show 1 reply
comeonbro • yesterday at 3:18 PM

What an incredible illustration of human intelligence failing to generalize out of distribution.