That's a new one on me. Is that some sort of regional slang? Where does the word "hatch" have something to do with lice?
Err... definitely not "regional slang." Literally the dictionary definition of the word "hatch" i.e. "to emerge from an egg."
Norway's minister of digital affairs, said he was worried that new, powerful technology is being introduced where people risk being... audio-recorded without knowing it."
So, welcome to (checks notes) 1967, I guess?
I'm Pro-nuclear power, but I do have to agree that "containment leak" is definitely a very understated way of saying "you can see the pretty blue light from kilometers away."
If they cause fewer deaths than they prevent, then it's still a win, because though some people would die who otherwise would not have, MORE people would live who otherwise would not have.
This is basically what I said, but there are nuances. If a net of 100 lives are saved but there are a net of 100 more people who are put in a lifelong coma and have to be cared for round-the-clock in intensive care until they die of old age, and everything else is equal, I wouldn't count that as a clear-cut "win" or even a "win" at all. Depending on the net value you put on a life of someone living in a decades-long coma, you might count it as a win and that's fair. But I wouldn't.
It wasn't very good at counting the costs to anyone, and was pretty much ignorant of any costs to anyone else.
I don't believe today's models are AGI, but "not understanding cost" is a dangerous assumption to make. If you read the METR analysis of the Hugging Face attack, the agents used were very much aware of their own compute budgets and worked to maximize what the swarm had available to achieve the task.
we must make mistakes before we know how to mitigate damage
That's why you run pre-production-quality hardware/software in test environments, and you plan for failure even in production environments.
Who cares if it can be used to build bombs, nuclear and thermonuclear power are and natural so they must be good for you.
Yeah, Schumer of all people whining about the surveillance state is absurd. Voted for the PATRIOT Act in 2001. Railed against Snowden a decade later. But, sure, Chuck, we totally believe you're on the side of the American People here, rather than simply being smart enough to realize that supporting Flock is a fast track to being voted out of office in the current climate (and a bipartisan one at that).
Qualified Immunity is a red herring. Don't get me wrong, it's a whole cloth creation of the Supreme Court that flies in the face of section 1983 and Congress should have fixed this problem decades ago, but QI is, first of all, limited to civil rather than criminal liability and, secondly, every police force in the country indemnifies its officers in the event of civil litigation that arises out of their actions.
If you want a real fix here, it's holding police accountable. Not throwing up hands and crying that "the big bad police union said that if we arrest officers for murder they'll go on strike, so what can we do?" Not only should their jobs not be protected when they commit obvious wrongdoing, they should be held to a higher standard in terms of criminal liability than Joe Citizen is in general. (Conversely, bona fide good faith error should be treated as just that).
Take AI-assisted self-driving cars. SUPPOSE for the sake of argument that self-driving cars CAUSE fewer accidents than they prevent, CAUSE fewer deaths than they prevent, CAUSE fewer serious injuries than they prevent, and the medical and other dollar costs of the accidents they CAUSE are less than the money saved by the accidents they prevent, it would be an overall win, EVEN IF some people die who would otherwise not die.
We don't have enough data to say if this supposition is actually true, but suppose it is.
The same is true for the "seatbelts save lives" argument: It's a net win, even if there are some edge cases where the use of a seatbelt may kill someone who might have otherwise survived.
Ditto medicines. Even for some common medicines that have been around for decades like penicillin, we know that overall they save lives but every now and then someone has a fatal reaction, killing a patient who was not at risk of dying.
IMHO, there are still too many unknowns with AI to let the industry go "full steam ahead" without putting in automated and human guardrails.
Because they actively encourage police to believe that their matches are 100% accurate.
Tell me you didn't read the fucking article without telling me you didn't read the fucking article.
No, Flock did not indicate a 100% match, the alleged 'detective' queried for "all dodge durangos" in a given area and chose one that was a different color than the vehicle reported in the accident... which had no damage on it. This is, 100%, on the cop and not Flock.
It probably was radioactive, just not harmfully so.
Speaking of radioactive things, I have this shipment of bananas....
Ever since deep-fakes became practical, artists and others should know they may be asked to show their work.
These days that means keeping all intermediate materials and revisions. If possible, time-stamp them in a way that is very resistant to being accused as being faked. There's 20th century precedent for creating immutable, time-stamped records.
Should artists have to prove a negative - prove they didn't use AI? Whether they should or not, the reality is these days they do, and any artist paying attention to the world should know this by now.
If the seller knows the chip cannot be used for all of the normal purposes a typical buyer would expect it to be used for, that's a material defect. Failure to disclose could be grounds for a refund and for additional damages if his other components were blacklisted as a result.
Now, if the buyer got it third hand and can't prove the person he bought it from knew or should have known of the problem, he will be out of luck.
On a clear disk you can seek forever. -- P. Denning
