Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

ELON MUSK: "OpenAI have what's called human reinforcement learning, which is another way of saying that they have a whole bunch of people that look at the output of ChatGPT and then say whether that's okay or not okay. Essentially they are training the AI to lie."

118,646 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Sam Altman's new interview: AI should not be designed to pursue goals that are disconnected from human needs. People must remain at the center of AI development. “I have no interest in building a super-smart AI that accomplishes some non-human goals. People should react. People should say, ‘Hey, this is what I want, and this is what I do not want.’ I do not think the issue is that we have failed to explain the benefits. We say, ‘AI is going to cure a bunch of diseases,’ and people say, ‘Okay, that is great, but that is not really my question. My question is: What is my role in the future? What is my economic future? What is my agency? How do I know that my kids and my family will still be able to have fulfilling, creative expression, struggle, drive the world forward, grow, and do this thing together in a way that has worked for a long time?’ When people in AI say, ‘Sure, there are going to be no jobs,’ or ‘50% of jobs are going to go away,’ or ‘90% of jobs are going to go away,’ and ‘AI is going to be smarter than you at everything,’ and ‘We will give you some basic income, but you are not really going to have a role,’ that is horrible. And by the way, if an AI company says, ‘Maybe we are going to destroy all the jobs, and we will be the most valuable company in the world,’ people should look at you like, ‘Yeah, that is a terrible message.’ I do not think the problem is that we have not articulated the upsides. I think people actually believe us. They hear, ‘AI may cure your cancer,’ and they think, ‘That sounds great.’ I think we, as an industry, have failed to explain how people stay in control of determining the future at every step, and how people can still have a meaningful life in all the ways we care about.” ---- From "CNBC Television" YouTube channel, (link in comment)

Rohan Paul

79,111 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Who Won? Elon Musk Debates Don Lemon Over the Impact of DEI Programs Lemon repeatedly said, “There’s no evidence” that DEI programs are lowering medical standards, a comment Elon Musk believes is a “false statement.” Who is right? Musk calls on Community Notes to settle the score. LEMON: “There was a repost of Ben Shapiro that you claim that DEI is killing people. Specifically, you point to medicine. You claim that DEI programs are putting people at risk. Do you really believe this to be true? And what evidence do you have to support it?” MUSK: “What I was referring to there was that if we lower the standards for doctors, if the test for a doctor is lowered, then the probability of them making a mistake and killing someone is obviously going to be higher.” LEMON: “Wait, say that again. I’m not sure I understand what you said. I want to make sure I understand what you’re saying.” MUSK: “Yes. If the status for passing medical exams and becoming a doctor, especially something like a surgeon, if the standards are lowered, then the probability that the surgeon will make a mistake is higher. They’re making mistakes in their exam. They may make mistakes with people — and that may result in people dying.” LEMON: “What evidence do you have, though, that they’re lowering the standards? There is no evidence of that.” MUSK: “I believe there is.” LEMON: “There’s no evidence of that, Elon. What is the evidence?” MUSK: “I believe they have literally lowered the standards at Duke University, and that is what the article was referring to. You are saying they have not lowered the standards?” LEMON: “There’s no evidence about lowering standards. And I think that there is —” MUSK: “I believe that is a false statement you’re making.” LEMON: “Okay, well, we’ll figure it out.” MUSK: “The interesting thing is, when this is posted on the X platform, there will be a whole bunch of things that rebut what you said and what I said. And so people can then make their own decision, based on the replies and the rebuttals and the community notes.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

5,539,073 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Elon Musk: The cumulative voice of the people should decide what's newsworthy. “In times past, we didn't have the technology for this, so the only way to learn news was for it to be filtered through a small number of news organizations and then to be printed in newspapers or broadcast. There wasn't really any way that people could speak to each other or communicate with each other. But now there is, because people can be online. I'm a big believer in citizen journalism being actually way better. At first, citizen journalism may sound like, well, doesn't that mean just a whole bunch of amateurs are doing journalism? No, actually, it's way better because if you have actual experts in the field saying things that's way better than a journalist, if you have people who are actually at the event, live. Look at the attempted assassination of President Trump, people actually at the event live, doing video, people are reporting it. That's the kind of thing that is actually far better information than filtering it through a small number of publications, which ends up being controlled by maybe five editors-in-chief. There's like five people that control the news. And even though there are multiple newspapers, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, a few others, they decide what is newsworthy. But that should not be how it works. It should be the voice of the people, the cumulative voice of the people should decide what is newsworthy.” Philadelphia, October 18, 2024

ELON CLIPS

20,819,970 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr