Відео

Please share rest of the conversation

Where is the ret of the video??

Hey Azeem, great discussion. Could you please share the rest of the conversation?

42:00 These liability laws as suggested are insane. It's like saying Adobe is liable for any nsfw pic made/edited in photoshop that is missused. (Ex, shown to children, or made from children) It is demanding something that isn't possible. Even if the companies come close, it would make them liable if they get hacked. Like me having to pay if someone breaks into my house and steals something. Due diligence is fine to ask. I'd say Open AI overdoes due diligence as it is. But anything outside that is just a shutdown.

Thanks for making this video! I use notebookLM frequently. I run a newsletter, and the audio summaries allowed me to also target my audio listeners

This guy is a co-opted shill for Big AI meant to persuade us all that the industry doesn’t present an existential threat to all of us. He is very similar to the “scientists” co-opted by Big Tobacco in the 70s. He deserves zero respect, just a puppet.

Fifty years some people were wrong about the future, that means nothing bad will ever happen. Ok good.

I really wanted to hear his opinion on art, this was quite frustrating as we really need to let him talk. Thank you for having him on though.

A good salesman should let the customer do 80% of the talking. The host here seems to have this concept reversed. Does he have some kind of inferiority complex?

Interesting, but the premise of regulation falls apart when you understand that the government model is the most corrupt system of all. Historically, some of the worst uses of technology have been commanded by governments. Or think of large-scale projects that could benefit humanity, such as geothermal energy, space elevators, and engineered smart cities, which have not even been proposed by the government, the sole institution that collects society's taxes. Isn't inaction in the face of harm or damage malevolent? Oh, but then give these people more power! Yup, that will totally work out well, nothing wrong with that, let's all just keep drinking the FDA approved oils, let's keep trusting the IRS to tax the rich, the Feds from not printing more debt, sure let's have them regulate AI too!

This is unwatchable. The presenter should be asking short, sharp questions. He is doing the exact opposite. He likes the sound of his own voice, and thinks he is as much an AI expert as Connor. Nobody is intersted in what he has to say. Stopped watching after 15 minutes

This dude sounds like a scammer. Silicon valley has gone to shit because of H-1B. Gone are the halcyon days of George Moore and Irwin M. Jacobs.

Is there a version of this video without the presenter interrupting. I need to get a (probably ML enabled) video editor, to cut out all the host interruptions.

just impossible to see with so many interruptions

Debating the Existential Risk of AI with Connor Leahy: Key Takeaways The UA-cam video "Debating the Existential Risk of AI, with Connor Leahy" features a fascinating discussion between Connor Leahy, founder of Conjecture, and Aar, host of the Exponential View podcast. They explore the potential risks of advanced AI, particularly Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), and discuss possible solutions to mitigate those risks. Here are some key takeaways: The Core Concerns: Existential Risk: Leahy argues that AGI, if developed too quickly, could pose an existential risk to humanity due to its potential to surpass human intelligence and control. He compares this risk to nuclear weapons and synthetic biology. Lack of Democratic Consent: Leahy questions the ethical legitimacy of developing such powerful technology without global consensus and democratic processes. Time Compression: Leahy and Aar acknowledge the accelerating pace of technological advancement and the potential for AI development to outpace humanity's capacity to adapt and regulate. Possible Solutions: Co-evolution: Both agree that, as with past technologies, we can co-evolve safeguards and regulations alongside AI development. Compute Caps: Leahy proposes government-imposed limits on the computational resources used to train powerful AI models, arguing that this would buy us time to develop safer alternatives. Liability Frameworks: Leahy emphasizes the need for strict liability laws for AI developers, holding them responsible for potential harms caused by their creations, even if they did not intend those harms. Global Kill Switch: Leahy advocates for a protocol allowing a significant number of nations to jointly shut down public-facing AI systems in emergencies. Citizens' Assemblies: Aar suggests the use of citizens' assemblies, deliberative forums engaging diverse perspectives, to better understand societal values and guide AI development. Points of Disagreement: Pace of Development: Leahy expresses greater concern about the rapid pace of AI development, believing that it is likely to outpace our ability to control it. Aar is more optimistic about the potential for co-evolution and adaptation. Feasibility of Solutions: Leahy is more optimistic about the feasibility of political solutions like compute caps and kill switches, while Aar is more skeptical due to the complexity of the technology and the difficulty of achieving global consensus. Key Concepts: Time-Space Compression: The accelerating pace of technological change and globalization, leading to a sense of compressed time and shrinking distances. Black Box Technologies: Technologies so dangerous that their potential consequences are unknown and potentially catastrophic. Swiss Cheese Model of Safety: Multiple layers of overlapping safeguards to mitigate the potential for failure. Lump of Labor Fallacy: The misconception that there is a fixed amount of work available, ignoring the potential for market expansion and new job creation. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexity of AI safety and the need for a nuanced approach that considers both technological and societal factors. Both Leahy and Aar acknowledge the potential risks of advanced AI, but they differ in their assessments of the timeline and the feasibility of various solutions. The conversation provides valuable insights for those interested in the future of AI and its impact on humanity.

12 min in and I can't go any further. The host interruptions are far too self absorbed. Also, his editing of his speaking without cuts is obvious he can't get past his ego. Not a debate.

What the fuck is this? I can't believe Connor agreed to talk to this clown.

By YouSum Live 00:00:00 AI-driven product evaluation and optimization. 00:00:31 Perplexity AI service: user-centric, efficient, and accurate. 00:02:10 Overcoming limitations of traditional search engines. 00:06:40 Importance of speed and accuracy in query responses. 00:13:58 Balancing iteration culture and pursuit of perfection. 00:16:58 Prioritizing user experience over model benchmarks. 00:18:23 Challenges of transitioning to faster, cheaper models. 00:20:19 Large Enterprises struggle with LLMS statistical nature. 00:20:41 Building products with LLMS poses capability challenges. 00:21:15 Perplexity pioneers LLMS product engineering discipline successfully. 00:21:32 User-centric approach crucial, regardless of solution complexity. 00:22:01 User focus overrides internal challenges in product development. 00:23:38 Model deployment hinges on accuracy and user feedback responsiveness. 00:24:28 Model improvements drastically enhance product performance and reliability. 00:25:42 Future AI models expected to be more cost-effective and accurate. 00:33:25 AI integration reshapes job roles towards entrepreneurship and AI utilization. 00:40:16 AI augments human capabilities, emphasizing collaboration over replacement fears. 00:40:55 AI development and ethical implications. 00:41:01 Progress in AI co-piloting with human involvement. 00:41:53 Challenges in achieving AGI and scientific advancements needed. 00:43:07 Importance of LLMS and Alpha Zero in AI innovation. 00:43:54 Limitations of Alpha Zero in open-ended scenarios. 00:44:20 Internet data as the foundation for AI training. 00:44:44 Evolution from human intelligence to neural networks. 00:46:28 Balancing AI autonomy with human oversight for safety. 00:49:13 Ensuring AI interfaces are trustworthy and secure. 00:53:45 Debate on open-source vs. closed-source AI models. 01:00:52 Need for more awareness and education on AI tools. 01:01:30 Liberating humans from day-to-day work through technology. 01:02:00 Historical lessons on economic rewards and labor movements. 01:02:56 Ensuring global voices are heard in rapid consultation processes. 01:03:25 Lowering barriers to entry and increasing access to information. 01:03:42 Democratizing knowledge and personalized learning experiences. 01:04:44 Democratization of information and knowledge for all. 01:05:10 Encouraging continuous learning and deeper exploration of topics. 01:05:39 Advancing towards a smarter planet through accessible information. By YouSum Live

I can’t focus on the discussion because of the distracting breathing type noise in the background

Excuse me, but the corporation Open AI is legally required to create profit for it's investors. So it doesn't matter what the public thinks or whether they have consented or if it's dangerous. Open AI must continue to create more and ore powerful AI and create more profit or the shareholders could legally remove the CEO and replace them with a more profit oriented one, Thank you Sam! #save my AI profits.

Let the guest talk without interrupting

any relation to Mr. Leahy of Sunnyvale?

"A smarter planet is a better planet", couldn't agree more

"Knowledge has a beginning, but no end"

Frustrating to watch. When you ask a question... Listen to the answer!!!

You remind of one of the brothers from EFDawah, Br Abbas.

This freako needs to chill the f out already. Annoying AF.

Thank you so much Azeem and Aravind - I learned so much from your interview. What a gift! 🎁🙏🏻

Thank you for having this conversation. At least I'm not crazy. This is real.

It certainly has raised my mind in ways i never thought I was capable of understanding. Or even better, things I simply wasn't aware of.

I find watching law and crime detective interviews gives me some ideas how to get info out of this thing. I'm amazed and horrified that this thing is in the hands of any human. The opportunity for snafu is emense. The disruption over the next few years, hard to comprehend. The velocity of it. I can't keep up.

Please next time, keep your precious ego in check and let your quest talk without a constant interuption by those crudely intervening self-absorbed monologues. Othervise, good conversation about an important topic. (somewhat ctitical, but) Thumb up.

Don't insult Alfred Korzybski. Alfred Korzybski was not a Jew. He was a Polish aristocrat.

14:42 "It's quite hard to know" ... Bruh. Connor's right, you can talk to your computer. If you think that means it's quite hard to know, I don't think you're the right person to be having this discussion. I mean what would it take? The computer becomes a genie with infinite wishes that can fulfill any desire? Would you know then? What do you think the early stage looks like? lol

Computer by itself created inventions. This is written on the Internet.

Next time..Let Connor drive the conversation. Dont steal his thunder. But I enjoyed parts of your talk👍. Cheers

Bruv, are you an AI? All those micro-edits where you're jumping frames every other second are annoying af.

very hard to listen to, host kept rudely interrupting guest

How do you turn human cloning into revenue in a year? That’s why it was so easy to stop.

To be clear: I am very impressed by Connor's intelligence and I enjoy listening to him because I am also a fan of his delivery and style. I also sport the same hair style as he does. What I don't share is his mustache, and the reason is that in France that kind of mustache would immediately be understood as a symbol and marker of his solidarity with French farmers whose indentifier he is sporting on his upper lip. That is the reason everyone in the Asterix village has that kind of mustache: It's a joke, Asterix & Co. are the French version of the stereotype of hillbillies.

You have a new subscriber, this was a wonderful intelligent and respectful discussion. Rare to get the sense that two people truly listened to each others point of view and perhaps adjusted their mental models.

A “debate” would be described as TWO points of view. If you have a guest, you need to let them speak and not interrupt and dominate the discussion.

Its absolutely thousand of times-x-wayyyyy easier, for a whole planet... coming from eating own shit in the djungle... to build super-atomic-quantum-fusion-agi-robot's..... as beeing nice to each other. We definetly have no intelligence problem. we have an worldwide timeless emotional problem.

Taxing Automation & AI, will be enough to pay for all our basic needs then keep old jobs like artist as hobbies to make a small amount of extra money to support the hobby & other interests.

I call it Darwin Award technologies ends the species/world, example teleportation, if one person can teleport, one person can teleport the whole planet into the sun ending everything. Granted the first person with a Darwin Award technology instantly rules the world under threat of total destruction if no one else has one.

There's only 2 rules for AI. 1st:Don't let it operate the internet only scan it. 2ndly:Don't build robots for the AI to operate only let robots use what it has on board to do exactly its specific job. A 3rd rule could be don't give AI human rights they aren't human.

Leahy is a grifter

I'd like to hear more of Connor and less of you 😞

Nick Land was mentioned. Incredible!

Once again, a really great conversation. Super informed questions, and you were able to bring your other experiences to bear with respect to the political and social aspects. I really like that you avoided a confrontational attitude upfront. Connor has tended towards heated discussions in the past (he's gotten better at it), and I think the tone you set actually allowed him to make more nuanced points, even with your push back. Would definitely like to see you have more conversations like this with Connor and others.