TL;DR: The regulation of Large Language Models (LLMs) and cybersecurity tools is a complex issue that necessitates a mature, harmonious, and peaceful society. The failures of Google Stadia and Facebook’s Metaverse underscore the pitfalls of pursuing unachievable ideas in a world that is not yet fully harmonious or peaceful.
In the intricate world of cybersecurity, the absence of global regulation is a significant concern. This isn’t due to negligence, but rather the need for a society that is harmonious, mature, and fundamentally peaceful. The rapid advancement of technology could pose a national security risk if any hindrance occurs, as competitors and adversaries could potentially outpace us. This underscores the importance of fostering a mature society that can handle these advancements responsibly and peacefully.
The same principle applies to LLMs. The inherent nature of software, which transcends borders and propagates rapidly, makes regulation a daunting task. The solution, much like cybersecurity tools, lies in the maturation and peaceful evolution of our global society. Only in a mature and peaceful society can we hope to effectively regulate such powerful tools.
In the business world, we see similar patterns. Google Stadia and Facebook’s Metaverse both failed due to the pursuit of unachievable ideas. For Google Stadia, global internet speeds and the business model were its downfall. Facebook’s Metaverse, on the other hand, failed to generate the necessary hype as it didn’t bring anything new to the table, and VR booms are typically based on significant technological advances and more attainable prices. These failures highlight the need for a more mature society that can realistically assess and support technological advancements.
The regulation of nuclear weapons provides a historical point of reference. North Korea, for instance, has tested rocket launches numerous times. According to the Nuclear Threat Initiative, North Korea conducted its first nuclear test in 2006 and has since conducted several more, with the most recent one in 2017 (source: Nuclear Threat Initiative). This raises the question: do LLMs have any choice but to follow the same path as nuclear war? Anyone can build them, but it requires significant resources and knowledge. This further emphasizes the need for a mature and peaceful society to responsibly manage such powerful tools.
OpenAI’s pursuit of understanding and regulating LLMs is commendable, yet it also raises concerns. The path they are embarking on is fraught with challenges and uncertainties. However, their work in the field of AI, potentially bringing us closer to AGI, a feat many of us thought was unattainable, deserves respect.
I’d love to hear some ideas regarding this!