I am not afraid of robots. I am afraid of people.
We recorded 12 claims from this post. 2 were checked against evidence. 10 can’t be checked. 5 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (12)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“I’m more concerned about bad outcomes for AI now than at any other point in my life.”
What we tested: Marcus is more concerned about bad AI outcomes now (April 2023) than at any prior point in his life.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“On a 1-10 scale of least worried to most worried, I was at a 6. Now I am at an I- don’t-think-about-much-else 9.”
What we tested: Marcus's worry about AI rose from 6 out of 10 a year earlier to 9 out of 10 in April 2023.
Assessment: SupportedSaid
“At some level the petition worked; Capitol Hill, for example, pretty clearly got the message that we can’t sit around forever on these issues.”
What we tested: At some level the FLI pause petition worked; for example, Capitol Hill pretty clearly got the message that we can't sit around forever on AI issues.
What happened: Mast responds favorably. (Fox News, )
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“The main thing that worries me is that I see self-interest on all sides, and not just the corporate players, when what we really need is coordinated action.”
What we tested: Marcus's main worry is that he sees self-interest on all sides of the AI debate, not just among corporate players, when what is really needed is coordinated action.
Assessment: SupportedSaid
“Whether or not you want a pause, the reality is that large language models remain exactly what I have always described them to be: bulls in a china shop, powerful, reckless, and difficult to control.”
What we tested: Large language models remain powerful, reckless, and difficult to control.
What happened: The report documents strong professional and academic benchmark results, supporting substantial capability. Its alignment improvements are also counterevidence to any reading that denies progress in control. (OpenAI via arXiv, )
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Making new systems that are “more accurate, safe, interpretable, transparent, robust, aligned, trustworthy, and loyal” should literally be at the top of everyone’s agenda.”
What we tested: Making new AI systems that are more accurate, safe, interpretable, transparent, robust, aligned, trustworthy, and loyal should literally be at the top of everyone's agenda.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“It was definitely too hypey around the imminence of artificial general intelligence (I held my nose on that point); there is no obvious way to get ensure compliance; China might go ahead anyway; we don’t even know how to evaluate the proposed ban’s main criterion.”
What we tested: There is no obvious way to ensure compliance with the proposed moratorium, China might go ahead anyway, and we don't even know how to evaluate the ban's main criterion (halting systems more powerful than GPT-4).
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“To be honest, I would have preferred my own proposed moratorium, co-written a month earlier, with Canadian Member of Parliament Michelle Rempel Garner, which called for a temporary ban on widescale deployment (not research), until we could put in a regulatory infrastructure modeled on establishing the safety of medicines, with phased roll out and safety cases.”
What we tested: Widescale AI deployment (not research) should be temporarily banned until a medicine-style regulatory regime with phased rollout and safety cases is in place.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“If we want to get to AI we can trust, probably the first thing we are going to need is a coalition.”
What we tested: If we want to get to AI we can trust, probably the first thing we are going to need is a coalition.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Which is why either/or thinking – thinking my problems are more important than your problems – is deadly.”
What we tested: Because no single solution fixes AI's problems, treating one set of AI risks as more important to the exclusion of others is harmful.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“Absolutely, a Manhattan project on getting AI systems to align with human values would be a great thing.”
What we tested: A Manhattan Project-scale effort to make AI systems align with human values would be a great thing.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
“The sooner we stop bickering and starting getting to it, the better.”
What we tested: The AI community should stop infighting and start on trustworthy-AI research as soon as possible.
Held from this post (5)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- The record does not meet the current rules. Our reading, not assessed: OpenAI has effectively become a for-profit oriented around Microsoft's goals, de-emphasizing its humanitarian charter, a shift accelerated by the $10 billion Microsoft deal.
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: There are tons of examples of successful regulation, such as seatbelt laws, which have saved something like 300,000 lives.
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: Despite Microsoft's claimed fixes, Bing chat can still easily be jailbroken to produce egregious misinformation.
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews read the claim differently