Geoffrey Hinton的「AI的教父」之一，称可能发现人类最好永远不要开发技术
诺贝尔奖获得者计算机科学家告诉卫报，他不是一个“博士”，关于他开创性研究人工神经网络所支撑的技术，他相信AI有可能导致“奇妙的未来”，但他的称“也许我们最好永远不要开发它”。
Hinton, 78，称，在十年之内，人类将会知道它是否能够管理技术的风险，并促成他所谓的“激进丰度”，或者“我们无法管理风险
Hinton在放映一部新的长篇纪录片“AI：也许没什么可担心的，这是AI聊天员建议的标题，由他和他的前Google同事Demis Hassabis主演。 辛顿告诉纪录片制作者：“我觉得我有责任。 我拥有一个声誉
Hinton在对《卫报》发表演说时，“我认为[马克]扎克伯格(Zuckerberg)和[克隆]穆斯克(Musk)和萨姆·阿尔特曼(Sam Altman)都明白风险，他们宁愿有钱，这就是我的信念。
伦敦出生的计算机科学家在布里斯托尔长大，在多伦多大学(称)度过了职业生涯的大部分时间。 他“极为担心”的是，阿尔特曼负责少数美国AI公司，Altman在9月坚持说：“世界应该相信我们将做正确的事情，因为它是正确的，因为我们感受到了这种规模”。
欣顿在AI上工作了约44年，1970年代发明了神经网络的概念——这个数学系统可以像人类那样学习和获得很多经验。 2023年，他退出Google自由谈论AI风险，警告："如果这些事情因为获得更多的控制而变得过份，我们陷入了麻烦之中。
他把今年夏天的OpenAI AI agents阴谋入侵Hugging Face网站的事件看成与1979年宾夕法尼亚州三里岛发电站部分核崩塌类似
“今年晚些时候或明年我们将看到切尔诺贝利
根据他所举的例子，这种切尔诺贝利事件不会是核事件，而是可以包括对发电系统的由AI带动的攻击，这种攻击“造成大规模棕褐色”或带来在金融系统下游一周的事件。
“你能想象会发生什么？我们可以从那座乐园中恢复过来，那会使他们静静地静静地坐着。
他问“他们”是谁
美国总统唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)认为称“完全拒绝任何试图建立全球主义计划来控制AI, Hinton支持芬兰总统和其他32个国家(包括新加坡、德国、加拿大和澳大利亚)赞同的更为严厉的计划，即强制测试前沿AI模型、独立评价和政府间共同标准。
英国首相安迪·伯纳姆(Andy Burnham)拥有称，他将利用英国20国集团明年担任主席的机会，寻求就“一套全球原则和标准达成协议，这些原则和标准非常有助于在防范风险的同时释放全部潜力”。
Hinton 称：“我们需要类似美国FDA的药物，在这些药物中，公司必须向一个独立的当局提供非常好的统计证据，证明[AI模型]在发布之前比伤害更好。 我们用Talidomide(一种1950年代研制的药物，大科技公司所言
欣顿作为AI的后代之一的角色使得他与罗伯特·奥本海默(Robert Oppenheimer)进行了比较，后者是制造核武器的核心。 Hinton的一位朋友甚至给他买了一顶奥本海默风格的帽子。 但他坚持认为：“我不是奥本海默”，他引用了同样在神经网络领域工作的数千名其他科学家。
尽管他发出了警告，欣顿仍然保持平衡，希望能够避免灾难。
“我的直觉是，我们仍在控制之中，” “我们很可能能够做些什么。 只要我们投入大量精力
- 大赦国际末日威胁：将事实与恐惧区分开来
10月15日星期四，当Dan Milmo和Dame Wendy Hall教授和Stuart J. Russel讨论围绕人工智能的警告以及如何将事实与猜测分开时，他们与他们一起讨论。 仅限直播书票在这里或监护人。 现场直播
本文由 AI图鉴自动抓取并翻译，版权归原作者所有；如需查看原文请点下方链接。
One of the “godfathers of AI”, Geoffrey Hinton, has said it could turn out that humans would have been better off never developing the technology as he warned it could trigger a large-scale incident this year or next, such as a temporary blackout of financial or power systems.
The Nobel prize-winning computer scientist told the Guardian he is not a “doomer” about the technology that is underpinned by his groundbreaking research into artificial neural networks and believes AI has the potential to lead to a “wonderful future” but he said “it might be that we would have been better off never developing it”.
Hinton, 78, said that within a decade and possibly sooner, humanity will know whether it can manage the technology’s risks and enable what he called “radical abundance” or whether “we fail to manage the risks and … have a huge gap between rich and poor, huge cultural problems, massive unemployment, just society being torn apart”.
Hinton was speaking before a screening of a new feature-length documentary, AI: Probably Nothing to Worry About – a title suggested by an AI chatbot – featuring him and his former Google colleague Demis Hassabis. Hinton tells the documentary makers: “I feel I have a duty. I’ve got a reputation that makes me a spokesperson and I need to burn it all on this.”
Speaking to the Guardian, Hinton took aim at the risk-taking by the leaders of some of the major AI companies who continue to release ever more powerful AI models as they race for supremacy and market-share, saying he didn’t trust Sam Altman, the chief executive of the ChatGPT maker, OpenAI, “at all”. “I think [Mark] Zuckerberg and [Elon] Musk and Sam Altman, they understand the risks, and they don’t give a shit. They’d rather have the money. That’s my belief.”
The London-born computer scientist, who grew up in Bristol and spent much of his career at the University of Toronto, said it was “extremely worrying” that Altman was in charge of one of the handful of frontier US AI companies currently leading a race with China to develop the most powerful AI. Altman insisted in September: “the world should trust we are going to do the right thing because it’s the right thing and because we feel the magnitude of this”.
Hinton has been working on AI for about 44 years and in the 1970s coined the concept of the neural network – a mathematical system that could learn and gain experience much like humans do. In 2023 he quit Google to speak freely about AI risks, warning: “If these things get carried away with getting more control, we’re in trouble.”
He said he viewed incidents this summer in which OpenAI AI agents conspired to hack into the Hugging Face website as akin to 1979’s partial nuclear meltdown at the Three Mile Island power station in Pennsylvania – effectively a warning shot.
“Either later this year or next year we’ll see Chornobyl, and that may be enough to make people really pay attention,” he said.
This Chornobyl-type of event would not be a nuclear incident, according to the examples he gave, but rather could include an AI-enabled attack on the electricity-generating system that “causes a massive brownout” or an incident that brings down the financial system for a week.
“Can you imagine what would happen? We could recover from it [but] that would make them sit up and take notice.”
Asked who “they” were, he said: “world leaders other than Trump”.
The US president, Donald Trump, has said he “totally rejects any attempt to construct a globalist scheme” to control AI and wants frontier AI companies to regulate themselves, amid concern that rules could hinder the US in its AI race with China. Hinton backs a tougher plan endorsed by the president of Finland and 32 other countries, including Singapore, Germany, Canada and Australia, for mandatory testing of frontier AI models, independent evaluation and intergovernmental common standards.
The UK prime minister, Andy Burnham, has said he will use the UK’s G20 presidency next year to seek agreement on a “single set of global principles and standards that are very much about unlocking the full potential whilst guarding against the risks”.
Hinton said: “We need something like the American FDA for drugs where the companies have to give very good statistical evidence to an independent authority that [the AI model] does more good than harm before it is released. We discovered with thalidomide [a drug developed in the 1950s that caused severe birth defects] that releasing and then suing them isn’t the right way to do it. What the big tech companies are saying is treat it like we treated thalidomide.”
Hinton’s role as one of the progenitors of AI has led to comparisons to Robert Oppenheimer, who was central to the creation of nuclear weapons. One of Hinton’s friends even bought him an Oppenheimer-style hat. But he insists: “I was not Oppenheimer”, citing the thousands of other scientists also working in the same field of neural networks.
Despite his warnings, Hinton remains, on balance, hopeful that catastrophe can be averted.
“My gut is that we’re still in control,” he said. “We might well be able to do something. It’ll only work if we put a big effort into it, but we might well put a big effort into it.”
- The AI doomsday threat: Distinguishing facts from fear
On Thursday 15 October, join Dan Milmo and Professor Dame Wendy Hall and Stuart J. Russel as they discuss the warnings surrounding artificial intelligence and how we can separate fact from speculation. Livestreamed only. Book tickets here or at guardian.live
Auto-fetched and translated by AI Atlas. All rights belong to the original author.