Skip to content
HomeVideos
AllLongsCategoriesPlaylists
BooksBlogsPodcasts
HistoryListsWatch laterLiked videosFollowing

The videos, books, blogs and podcasts Hacker News keeps recommending, all in one place.

VideosBooksBlogsPodcastsAboutPrivacySettings

Data from Hacker News, HackerTube, HackerBooks, HackerBlogs and Open Library. Credits · Not affiliated with Y Combinator.

HomeVideosBooksBlogsPodcasts
Ctrl K

    Deadly Truth of General AI? - Computerphile

    Computerphile

    3 HN recommenders · recommended in 6 months, 2016–2024

    YouTube

    8:30 · 941K views · Jun 17, 2015

    A Computerphile video in which Rob Miles warns against assuming a general AI will think like a human. He uses the thought experiment of a stamp-collecting AI to show how a goal-driven system could pursue its aim with dangerous results.

    Often pointed to as an accessible first introduction to AI safety and why a superintelligent AI could be dangerous.

    AI, Machine Learning & DataAI safety, AGI & impact
    1. 5:58
      MarI/O - Machine Learning for Video GamesSethBling12M views • 11 years ago
    2. 16:29
      10 Reasons to Ignore AI SafetyRobert Miles AI Safety 363K views • 6 years ago
    3. 13:44
      Is AI Safety a Pascal's Mugging?Robert Miles AI Safety 388K views • 7 years ago
    4. 20:00
      AI "Stop Button" Problem - ComputerphileComputerphile1.4M views • 9 years ago
    5. 13:03
      Intelligence and Stupidity: The Orthogonality ThesisRobert Miles AI Safety 710K views • 8 years ago
    6. 54:35
      28c3: The coming war on general computation28c3267K views • 14 years ago
    7. 15:27
      Why Not Just: Think of AGI Like a Corporation?Robert Miles AI Safety 163K views • 7 years ago
    8. 10:36
      Why Would AI Want to do Bad Things? Instrumental ConvergenceRobert Miles AI Safety 274K views • 8 years ago
    9. 36:02
      ChatGPT with Rob Miles - ComputerphileComputerphile517K views • 3 years ago
    10. 18:05
      Intro to AI Safety, RemasteredRobert Miles AI Safety 210K views • 5 years ago
    11. 8:16
      Why Asimov's Laws of Robotics Don't Work - ComputerphileComputerphile873K views • 10 years ago
    12. 1:07:31
      The A.I. Dilemma - March 9, 2023Center for Humane Technology3.7M views • 3 years ago
    13. 9:33
      Avoiding Negative Side Effects: Concrete Problems in AI Safety part 1Robert Miles AI Safety 161K views • 9 years ago
    14. 1:57:02
      How We Prevent the AI’s from Killing us with Paul ChristianoBankless63K views • 3 years ago
    15. 11:47
      We Were Right! Real Inner MisalignmentRobert Miles AI Safety 271K views • 5 years ago
    16. 48:32
      Sparks of AGI: early experiments with GPT-4Sebastien Bubeck1.8M views • 3 years ago
    17. 3:17:51
      Eliezer Yudkowsky: Dangers of AI and the End of Human Civilization | Lex Fridman Podcast #368Lex Fridman2.2M views • 3 years ago
    18. 14:28
      Can we build AI without losing control over it? | Sam HarrisTED3.9M views • 10 years ago
    19. 19:29
      Glitch Tokens - ComputerphileComputerphile353K views • 3 years ago
    20. 1:03:18
      AI does not exist but it will ruin everything anywayAngela Collier 698K views • 3 years ago

    7 comments from Hacker News

    1. @pdkl95Mar 2016· in “Why AlphaGo Is Such a Big Deal”

      > exponential leap forward A recent(-ish) Computerphile video has a good overview of the AI-self-improvement problem. [LINK] I recommend watching the previous video first, which introduces the problem of strong-AI rapidly finding solutions (especially with poorly-specified questions) that may not be in humanity's best interest. this video Before anybody jumps to overly-sensational conclusions, note that the last video in that series, Rob Miles explains how exponential self-improvement is an extreme point in the space of possible AI development. We don't know how to predict discoveries[1], so we need more research into AI, so we can hopefully make something that isn't exponentially growing beyond our understanding. [LINK] [1] see James Burke's non-teleological view of change

      RecommendsView on HN
    2. @circuit10Apr 2023· in “GitHub Copilot emits GPL code”

      "those non-problems" Why is that a non-problem? It's a really important concern that we need to take more seriously I pasted this from another comment I wrote but: The concerns about AI taking over the world are valid and important; even if they sound silly at first, there is some very solid reasoning behind it. See this video for a really interesting video on why a theoretical superintelligent AI would be dangerous, and when you factor in that these models could self-improve and approach that level of intelligence it gets worrying…

      RecommendsView on HN
    3. @circuit10Apr 2023· in “Stability AI Launches the First of Its StableLM Suite of Language Models”

      But the concerns about AI taking over the world are valid and important; even if they sound silly at first, there is some very solid reasoning behind it. They’re big matrices, yes, but they’re Turing-complete which means they can theoretically do any computational task See this video for a really interesting video on why a theoretical superintelligent AI would be dangerous, and when you factor in that these models could self-improve and approach that level of intelligence it gets worrying…

      RecommendsView on HN
    4. @johncsDec 2022· in “Perhaps It Is a Bad Thing That the Leading AI Companies Cannot Control Their AIs”

      There's a great Computerphile video from 2015 that introduced me to the idea of AI safety awhile ago. It seems like some good context to this article: this video

      RecommendsView on HN
    5. @npocApr 2024· in “Bitcoin Block 840000”

      That's an issue with the concept of a "black budget", not the payment mechanism. The government corruption bitcoin stops is really bank corruption, but the central banks (including the fed) work hand in hand with the governments (control them in fact), so it's a kind of joint effort. The corruption works like this: When the Fed was formed in the early 20th century, it came to an agreement with the government to be able to print off unlimited amounts of money, providing it was in the form of loans and under the agreement that it would destroy the money when the loans were repaid. All under the Keynesian guise of "elasticity of money". The fly in the ointment is that the banks can charge interest on this money they print - if they didn't it would be a free-for all, because interest is what disincentivises debt. What this led to was the doubling of the money supply every decade for the last 100 years, as the banks are incentivised to lend as much money as possible. [LINK] Each time you double the number of currency units, the total value of the money is diluted across double the number of units and so the value of each unit is halved. If you do this too quickly, people lose confidence in the money and you fall into hyperinflation, but if you throttle it just right, they don't catch on. It helps that the value of consumables (cars, food, toothbrushes etc) goes down by around 5%/year due to technology-driven manufacturing efficiency gains. This means that they can devalue the curr

      CitesView on HN