- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2023 07:40:11 +0200
- To: ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals@yahoo.com>
- Cc: Adeel <aahmad1811@gmail.com>, "Patrick J. Hayes" <phayes@ihmc.org>, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com>, Public-cogai <public-cogai@w3.org>, W3C AIKR CG <public-aikr@w3.org>, adasal <adam.saltiel@gmail.com>, semantic-web <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+TOd1zpoKpD_=4tJbAgHXm1C=Z4vHQRcxS842JYPqZyg@mail.gmail.com>
po 3. 4. 2023 v 20:27 odesílatel ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program < metadataportals@yahoo.com> napsal: > I never expected my post to elicit such an amount of response. But for > direction's sake and for keeping on topic, let's take a look at the > takeaways. > > - LLMs aren't going away anywhere soon, especially with the insanely crazy > amounts of money being invested in it, having started an AI arms race of > sorts; > - the software industry and software giants like Microsoft and OpenAI > couldn't care less about regulation and factor in enormous fines as the > cost of doing business when making huge profits; > - the FutureofLife Open Letter to Pause Giant AI Experiments, more closely > looked at has some flaws; > - Timnit Gebru, Emily M. Bender, Angelina McMillan-Major and Margaret > Mitchell were not found on the list of signatories to the letter and > published a rebuke, calling out the letter's failure to engage with > existing problems caused by the tech, in particular the ideology of > longtermism that drives much of current AI development. > Source: > https://techcrunch.com/2023/03/31/ethicists-fire-back-at-ai-pause-letter-they-say-ignores-the-actual-harms/ > - all efforts to develop AI that meets with ethical guidelines, standards, > is open, explainable, controllable, trustworthy and safe, whether from the > UNESCO/UN, standards bodies, professional regulatory bodies and > professional associations by default are lagging behind; > - the potential users of a seemingly endless list of applications across a > wide board of industries of the LLMs are not fully aware of the > capabilities and potential unintended, or not disclosed secondary impacts; > - there are plenty of unknown unknowns, like emerging abilities now being > studied to comprehend and get a grasp on what the LLMs are capable of and > consequently the unintended, potentially harmful capabilities that in > certain cases need to be contained, avoided or disabled; > - the huge carbon and energy footprints of the infrastructure for the > global wide scale deployment of such technologies. > > All in all, in my humble opinion the best approach to tackle this issue is > to have both professionals inside the industry knowledgeable of the > problems, dangers and unknowns, together with professionals from the fields > of software engineering, computer science, mathematics and all fields and > industry currently using AI as a key technology (e.g. pharmaceutical > industry, biotechnologies, bio and life sciences, medical technologies, > natural and geo sciences, chemistry and material sciences) take a good look > at all the current proposals for guidelines for ethical, explainable, open, > safe and trustworthy AI, as they relate to their industries, field of > activities or scientific endeavors and condense these to an actionable list > for politicians both at national, regional and global body levels to work > on. > > And in the meantime have educators, academics, scientists, engineers and > professionals from industries using AI technologies stay on topic and > contribute to an open dialogue about the issues at hand. > > The issue is not to stop the development and deployment of AI but to do so > in a responsible way, based on some agreed upon consensus on guiding > principles. > I'd recommend this video to get a better understanding of the landscape and the threat model: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKgPg_j9eF0 > > > Milton Ponson > GSM: +297 747 8280 > PO Box 1154, Oranjestad > Aruba, Dutch Caribbean > Project Paradigm: Bringing the ICT tools for sustainable development to > all stakeholders worldwide through collaborative research on applied > mathematics, advanced modeling, software and standards development > > > On Saturday, April 1, 2023 at 10:15:41 PM AST, Melvin Carvalho < > melvincarvalho@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > so 1. 4. 2023 v 23:29 odesílatel Adeel <aahmad1811@gmail.com> napsal: > > It is a constructive discussion on the general ethics - it is a core > competency in every professionalism. Not left to legal speculation whether > it be the use of transformer models, code of conduct, or selectively > defined for others, practice what you preach which is the real issue with > ethics these days. > > > Perhaps calm down a bit and stay on-topic > > As an interesting exercise I ran this tread through chatGPT asking: "rate > this statement as whether or not it is passive agressive on a scale of 1 to > 10 and why" -- give it a try if you want to see some interesting results > > What is came up with passive aggression: > > Hugh - 3 > Dan - 5 > Pat - 4 > Adeel - 5,7 > Nathan (control) - 2 > > Perhaps if run again it would give different numbers. I expect AI is > going to be integrated into all sorts of tools, so that we'll get flags and > pointers in email before sending. Which will change the nature of mail > lists forever! > > As a side note I chat to new developers about semantic web all the time. > One recently said to me: "I hope stuff like this can popularize linked data > without the smugness". > > This is actually one of the more pleasant, jolly threads. But we probably > can and will do better as a list, when it starts to be common place for AI > tools to help us. > > It is a technology that huge implications for the semantic web. Because > the semantic web is about meaning. There are times when technology moves > too fast, and has societal implications, so imho, the question is legit. > Indeed in the AI world this topic has been the big one in the last week, > with dozens of different views. It's interesting. Emad has in any case > said he thinks gpt v.next will take 6-9 months to train anyway. > > The main limitation I have found is that it can do small tasks reasonably > well, but when you hit the 32k limit, it struggles just as much as we all > do with larger topics or code bases. Perhaps that will chain soon with > plugins tho, we'll see! > > > > On Sat, 1 Apr 2023 at 22:12, Patrick J. Hayes <phayes@ihmc.org> wrote: > > Adeel, greetings. > > The code of conduct applies to us all, including of course Dan B. But the > point here is that Dan has not violated that code, whereas you have, first > by directly insulting Dan by implying that his posts are dishonest or > motivated by dark or sinister commercial forces, and then by continuing > this thread of thinly veiled hostility when there is no reason for it. I am > not an administrator of this group, but if I were you would now be banned > from it. > > Please find some more constructive way to contribute to the discussion. > > Pat Hayes > > On Apr 1, 2023, at 1:22 PM, Adeel <aahmad1811@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > That sounds like a legal speculation, or do you only selectively > discriminate on group members and their backgrounds when you point that out? > Does the W3C code of conduct not apply to you after 25+ years of being > here? > > Thanks, > > Adeel > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 at 23:33, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 at 20:59, Adeel <aahmad1811@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > You can't talk about regulation and compliance in this group, dan doesn't > like it as google doesn't care about those things. > > > Rather, Google doesn’t delegate to me any permission to speak on its > behalf on these matters, unsurprisingly enough. Google is also and > organization of many thousand employees, with quite some range of views. I > choose not to share several of mine here right now, but I am broadly in > favour of sensible laws where they have some chance of working. > > As in many situations it sometimes makes sense to treat a company as a > kind of pretend person, and sometimes to look at it as a more complex > system of forces and interests. Skim > > https://www.wired.com/story/inside-google-three-years-misery-happiest-company-tech/ > <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.wired.com%2Fstory%2Finside-google-three-years-misery-happiest-company-tech%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cphayes%40ihmc.us%7Cd884dfb499ef423f124f08db32ef753e%7C2b38115bebad4aba9ea3b3779d8f4f43%7C1%7C0%7C638159776297688875%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=akFFkIcIXEgvQWjOdtQO4QjZOzAjTOJ82zH1mJwAb%2Bo%3D&reserved=0> > to see some of what bubbles beneath the surface. > > This email list is just an email list. W3C no longer accords it “interest > group“ status, as it did from 1999 when I migrated the older RDF-DEV list > to W3C to form the RDF Interest Group on www-rdf-interest@ list. W3C > doesn’t officially listen here even on RDF topics, let alone areas like > modern AI and their social impact which aren’t obviously our core > competency. > > Having been here 25+ years I have some instincts about which topics will > just fill up email inboxes with no ultimate impact on the world and > benefit. Right now “something must be banned” threads on AI look to me to > fall in that category. > > Cheers, > > Dan > > > > > Thanks, > > Adeel > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 at 20:22, adasal <adam.saltiel@gmail.com> wrote: > > It's out of the bottle and will be played with. > > " .. being run on consumer laptops. And that’s not even thinking about > state level actors .. " > Large resources will be thrown at this. > > It was a long time ago that Henry Story (of course, many others too, but > more in this context) pointed out that, as to what pertains to the truth, > competing logical deductions cannot decide themselves. > > I just had this experience, and the details are not important. > > > The point is that, in this case, I asked the same question to GPT-4 and > perplexity.ai > <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fperplexity.ai%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cphayes%40ihmc.us%7Cd884dfb499ef423f124f08db32ef753e%7C2b38115bebad4aba9ea3b3779d8f4f43%7C1%7C0%7C638159776297688875%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=twBLGhgQjubMJb6eq223Hsx8kKJMs8Tiq7jMBfpFyPc%3D&reserved=0>, > and they gave different answers. > Since it was something I wanted to know the answer to, and it was > sufficiently complex, I was not in a position to judge which was correct. > > Petitioning for funding for experts, i.e. researchers and university > professors. > Although it is absurd to think they would have time to mediate between all > the obscure information sorting correct from incorrect and, of course, a > person can be wrong too. > > Then there is the issue of attribution ... > At the moment, perplexity.ai > <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fperplexity.ai%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cphayes%40ihmc.us%7Cd884dfb499ef423f124f08db32ef753e%7C2b38115bebad4aba9ea3b3779d8f4f43%7C1%7C0%7C638159776297688875%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=twBLGhgQjubMJb6eq223Hsx8kKJMs8Tiq7jMBfpFyPc%3D&reserved=0> > has a word salad of dubious recent publications; GPT -4 has a "knowledge > cutoff for my training data is September 2021". It finds it difficult to > reason about time in any case, but these are details. > > Others in this email thread have cast doubt on Musk's motivation (give it > time to catch up) and Microsoft (didn't care for any consequences by > jumping in now). > > So there are issues of funding and control -- calling on the state to > intervene is appealing to the power next up the hierarchy, but can such > regulations be effective when administered by the state? > > That really just leaves us with grassroots education and everyday > intervention. > > Best on an important topic, > > > Adam > > Adam Saltiel > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 9:39 PM Martin Hepp <mfhepp@gmail.com> wrote: > > I could not agree more with Dan - a “non-proliferation” agreement nor a > moratorium of AI advancements is simply much more unrealistic than it was > with nukes. We hardly managed to keep the number of crazy people with > access to nukes under control, but for building your next generation of AI, > you will not need anything but brain, programming skills, and commodity > resources. Machines will not take over humankind, but machines can add > giant levers to single individuals or groups. > > Best wishes > Martin > > --------------------------------------- > martin hepp > www: https://www.heppnetz.de/ > <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.heppnetz.de%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cphayes%40ihmc.us%7Cd884dfb499ef423f124f08db32ef753e%7C2b38115bebad4aba9ea3b3779d8f4f43%7C1%7C0%7C638159776297845108%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=FCqp2o420lD%2FDJA%2BsW2xmUV1SL4eb4FqubE%2FFbQiwv0%3D&reserved=0> > > > On 29. Mar 2023, at 22:30, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 at 20:51, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program < > metadataportals@yahoo.com> wrote: > > This letter speaks for itself. > > > https://www.reuters.com/technology/musk-experts-urge-pause-training-ai-systems-that-can-outperform-gpt-4-2023-03-29/ > <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Ftechnology%2Fmusk-experts-urge-pause-training-ai-systems-that-can-outperform-gpt-4-2023-03-29%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cphayes%40ihmc.us%7Cd884dfb499ef423f124f08db32ef753e%7C2b38115bebad4aba9ea3b3779d8f4f43%7C1%7C0%7C638159776297845108%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=n%2BG6aomh5Ad6qwdk9euMYmYvQFLs0dSYFMpwJ%2FquyPo%3D&reserved=0> > > > I may not want to put it as bluntly as Elon Musk, who cautioned against > unregulated AI which he called "more dangerous than nukes", but when Nick > Bostrom, the late Stephen Hawking, and dozens, no hundreds of international > experts, scientists and industry leaders start ringing the bell, is is time > to pause and reflect. > > Every aspect of daily life, every industry, education systems, academia > and even our cognitive rights will be impacted. > > I would also like to point out that some science fiction authors have done > a great job on very accurately predicting a dystopian future ruled by > technology, perhaps the greatest of them all being Philip K. Dick. > > But there are dozens of other authors as well and they all give a fairly > good impression what awaits us if we do not regulate and control the > further development of AI now. > > > I have a *lot* of worries, but the genie is out of the bottle. > > It’s 60 lines of code for the basics, > https://jaykmody.com/blog/gpt-from-scratch/ > <https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjaykmody.com%2Fblog%2Fgpt-from-scratch%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cphayes%40ihmc.us%7Cd884dfb499ef423f124f08db32ef753e%7C2b38115bebad4aba9ea3b3779d8f4f43%7C1%7C0%7C638159776297845108%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2QEWpct5NS36zpwh2zyEISddXRBZMJeJtvMcQSJ8HME%3D&reserved=0> > > Facebook’s Llama model is out there, and being run on consumer laptops. > And that’s not even thinking about state level actors, or how such > regulation might be worded. > > For my part (and v personal opinion) I think focussing on education, > sensible implementation guidelines, and trying to make sure the good > outweighs the bad. > > Dan > > > > > Milton Ponson > GSM: +297 747 8280 > PO Box 1154, Oranjestad > Aruba, Dutch Caribbean > Project Paradigm: Bringing the ICT tools for sustainable development to > all stakeholders worldwide through collaborative research on applied > mathematics, advanced modeling, software and standards development > > >
Received on Tuesday, 4 April 2023 05:40:40 UTC