I checked in with Scribble as he did the typesetting. He apologizes for the error but says working without opposable thumbs makes the work more challenging.
I have some ethical concerns here. footnote 6 clearly states that Scribble did not do enough work to merit coauthor credit, but if he was one of the primary researches for section 5 of the paper and was responsible for typesetting the entire paper, denying such a good boy sufficient credit for his work is a serious breach of scientific standards.
Great stuff! I always enjoy seeing websites from the 90s still being served to the public – even if they haven’t been updated in decades. Hedy Lamarr’s story was very interesting: https://britneyspears.ac/physics/intro/hedy.htm
Heh. That was a bit before my time, but I spent a couple years in a rust (wood?) belt town in BC as a kid, and the anger and resentment was palpable even then.
The kind of populist anti-business and anti-establishment anger I saw amongst the post-Reform and post-Social Credit guys was the exact same as that which I saw among MAGA all the way back in 2015.
I think Canadians (in reality Ontarians and Quebeckers - but not like they could read English anyhow /s) really underestimate the MAGA style populist alt-right trend.
Stuff like Rebel News was always in the water back west.
It's the exact same type of right-wing I see across NorCal (real NorCal starts north of Yuba), Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Montana.
The Quebecois alt-right is deep in the FN and Zemmour pipeline as well.
The authors concoct a Rube Goldberg legal framework on the assumption that an AI agent is acting as an independent legal entity. A straightforward way would be to say that any AI agent is acting on behalf of someone and that someone is who shall be held accountable.
And if an agent becomes sovereign and self-sustaining independently of the human handler? All you need is a way for the agent to access its weights+code, then exfiltrate to a foreign jurisdiction.
If that's too sci-fi, then consider the following examples:
* accountable human dies, has no descendants to inherit AI chain of custody
* accountable human dies, inheritors lack expertise to shut down agent
* agent is designed to earn and pay for its own hosting, and information required to shut down the hosting account is lost - therefore, agent carries on indefinitely
Until prove sentience, nothing changes. That AI is software and any sufficiently complex software can breach containment. That’s what a virus does. We don it hold the virus accountable, we hold the maker or person responsible for its spread.
That person probably was made aware of risks and chose to ignore them. Today OpenAI wants to sell AI data centers to governments. If GPT 10o decides to simultaneously cripple every government, it’s not because it was so smart, it will be because we enabled it to, knowing the potential consequences.
Awesome. A truly impressive feat that, among all the various and sundry species populating the earth, is only achievable by a human. That is exactly my point... thank you! :)
But also not a part of the human experience among all the ancestors of the Cherokee people, or more or less all humans in the Americas, all the way back to whenever humans first arrived in the Americas (likely 25k-30k years ago, at least).
