Gary Marcus

Rank 17 of 47
|
Score 120
4/22/2024, 11:41:43 PM
X
In reply to:
Laura Edelson
@LauraEdelson2
·
178d
@GaryMarcus @OpenAI Ah, this is a different Biotoxins! risk. The one I was referring to was the discovery of new biotoxins via AI/ML. Which is something we have been living with for years. I encourage you to think about threat models and information delta.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
178d
@LauraEdelson2 not sure of this, as discussed here: https://garymarcus.substack.com/…

(@openai never responded to my concerns about their statistics)
Laura Edelson
@LauraEdelson2
·
178d
@GaryMarcus Re: bio weapons: it’s not that there’s no risk, it’s that the risk doesn’t come from LLMs. There are absolutely risks from transformer based models, but language models aren’t going to do much and I think these risks are best managed through physical-world restrictions anyway.
Laura Edelson
@LauraEdelson2
·
178d
@GaryMarcus I think we don’t fully understand the security risk profile of large models, and how much vulnerability is in weights vs. code. History suggests that more open is better, of course! My intuition is that most risk is application-specific, which means code.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
178d
@LauraEdelson2 Does this apply to open-weight models that are not truly open source?

I would also be interested in your arguments re bad actors and potential future bioweapons that you dismiss.
Laura Edelson
@LauraEdelson2
·
178d
Open source has also won the argument about security. Everyone (good and bad) finds bugs faster. But on balance, this appear to make software more secure, because there are more defenders than attackers.11/12

The statement is part of a complex discussion on the risks associated with biotechnologies and AI, specifically addressing the potential future implications of bioprinting and the need for comprehensive threat assessments. The tone is informative and engages with a public issue, contributing to a broader dialogue about technology, security, and ethics.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement aims to contribute constructively to the discussion without causing harm, focusing on the importance of considering all potential threats in decision-making. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the dignity of others and does not engage in any form of harassment or hate speech. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By emphasizing the need to consider future scenarios and potential threats, the statement promotes a deeper understanding and awareness of the issues discussed. [+1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in a constructive manner, addressing the points raised by others in the conversation without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses its influence to encourage a thoughtful and comprehensive approach to decision-making in the context of bioprinting and AI, aiming for societal betterment. [+1]
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement responsibly contributes to the public discourse on a significant issue, using the platform to inform and engage others. [+1]