OracleGPT: Thought Experiment on an AI Powered Executive

[alexpotato]

You sometimes hear people say "I mean, we can't just give an AI a bunch of money/important decisions and expect it to do ok" but this is already happening and has been for years.

Examples:

- Algorithmic trading: I once embedded on an Options trading desk. The head of desk mentioned that he didn't really know what the PnL was during trading hours b/c the swings were so big that only the computer algos knew if the decisions were correct.

- Autopilot: planes can now land themselves to an accuracy that is so precise that the front landing gear wheels "thud" as they go over the runway center markers.

and this has been true for at least 10 years.

In other words, if the above is possible then we are not far off from some kind of "expert system" that runs a business unit (which may be all robots or a mix of robots and people).

A great example of this is here: https://marshallbrain.com/manna1

EDIT: fixed some typos/left out words

[mjr00]

> A great example of this is here: https://marshallbrain.com/manna1

This is a piece of science fiction and has its own (inaccurate, IMO) view on how minimum wage McDonald's employees would react to a robot manager. Extrapolating this to real life is naive at best.

[pavel_lishin]

But none of those things are AI in the same sense that we use the term now, to refer to LLMs.

[altmanaltman]

"Expert system" running a company is never going to happen unless shareholders are okay with no accountability from the company. You'll always need someone to blame in case things go wrong. You could have an executive using such an "expert system" for literally all their decisions, but it has to be a human being signing off on those decisions. There is no way to prosecute code and unless these expert systems can become sentinent or appear in court, best of luck trying to let it run a company in the real sense of actually making those decisions with full autonomy and responsbility.

[djwide]

I'm saying there's something structurally different form autonomous systems generally and from an LLM corpus which has all of the information in one place and at least in theory extractable by one user.

[Guvante]

You gave examples of feedback loops.

We know very well how to train computers to handle those effectively.

Anything without quick feedback is much more difficult to do this way.

[kekqqq]

I must say that the book is unrealistic, but it makes a good sci-fi story. Thanks, I read it just now in 80 min.

[alanbernstein]

Considering things like Palantir, and the doge effort running through Musk, it seems inconceivable that this is not already the case.

I think I'm more curious about the possibility of using a special government LLM to implement direct democracy in a way that was previously impossible: collecting the preferences of 100M citizens, and synthesizing them into policy suggestions in a coherent way. I'm not necessarily optimistic about the idea, but it's a nice dream.

[djwide]

Thanks for the comment. Interesting to think about but I am also skeptical of who will be doing the "collecting" and "synthesizing". Both tasks are potentially loaded with political bias. Perhaps it's better than our current system though.

[ativzzz]

> special government LLM to implement direct democracy

I like your optimism, but I think realistically a special government LLM to implement authoritarianism is much more likely.

In the end, someone has to enforce the things an LLM spits out. Who does that? The people in charge. If you read any history, the most likely scenario will be the people in charge guiding the LLM to secure more power & wealth.

Now maybe it'll work for a while, depending on how good the safeguards are. Every empire only works for a while. It's a fun experiment

[Sheeny96]

Sounds like Helios https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swbGrpfaaaM

[Zagitta]

Centralising it is definitely the wrong way to go about it.

It'd be much better to train an agent per citizen, that's in their control, and have it participate in a direct democracy setup.

[stewh_eng]

Indirectly, this is kind of what I was trying to get at in this weekend project https://github.com/stewhsource/GovernmentGPT using the British commons debate history as a starting point to capture divergent views from political affiliation, region and role. Changes over time would be super interesting - but I never had time to dig into that. Tldr; it worked surprisingly well and I know a few students have picked it up to continue on this theme in their research projects

[zozbot234]

Real world LLM's cannot even write a proper legal brief without making stuff up, providing fake references and just spouting all sorts of ludicrous nonsense. Expecting them to set policy or even to provide effective suggestions to that effect is a fool's errand.

[mellosouls]

This is an interesting and thoughtful article I think, but worth evaluating in the context of the service ("cognitive security") its author is trying to sell.

That's not to undermine the substance of the discussion on political/constitutional risk under the inference-hoarding of authority, but I think it would be useful to bear in mind the author's commercial framing (or more charitably the motivation for the service if this philosophical consideration preceded it).

A couple of arguments against the idea of singular control would be that it requires technical experts to produce and manage it, and would be distributed internationally given any countries advanced enough would have their own versions; but it would of course provide tricky questions for elected representatives in the democratic countries to answer.

[djwide]

There's not a direct tie to what I'm trying to sell admittedly. I just thought it was a worthwhile topic of discussion - it doesn't need to be politically divisive and I might as well post it on my company site.

I don't think there are easy answers to the questions I am posing and any engineering solution would fall short. Thanks for reading.

[zozbot234]

The really nice thing about this proposal is that at least now we can all stop anthropomorphizing Larry Ellison, and give Oracle the properly robot-identifying CEO it deserves.

[Terr_]

For those who haven't seen the reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc&t=38m27s

[kmeisthax]

But then we'd have to call it LawnmowerGPT

[jeffrallen]

I came here for this, am not disappoint. :)

Best meme in hacker space, thanks /u/Cantrill.

[johnohara]

> The President sits at the top of the classification hierarchy.

Constitutionally, and in theory as Commander-In-Chief, perhaps. But in practice, it does not seem so. Worse yet, it's been reported the current President doesn't even bother to read the daily briefing as he doesn't trust it.

[handedness]

It's not an issue of theory-versus-practice.

You're conflating the classification system, established by EO and therefore by definition controlled by the Executive, with the classified products of intel agencies.

A particular POTUS's use (or lack thereof) of classified information has no bearing on the nature of the classification system.

[djwide]

I point that out a little bit when I refer to agencies being discouraged from sharing information. The CIA may be worried about losing HUMINT data to the NSA for example. You may be referring to them worrying about compartmentalizing the information away from the president as well which you are right happens to some extent now but shouldn't 'in theory'. Maybe it's a don't ask don't tell. I think Cheney blew the cover of an intel asset though.

[SoftTalker]

And the last president couldn't comprehend it.

<shrug>

[MengerSponge]

A COMPUTER CAN NEVER BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE THEREFORE A COMPUTER MUST NEVER MAKE A MANAGEMENT DECISION.

[toomuchtodo]

While I have great respect for this piece of IBM literature, I will also mention that most humans are not held accountable for management decisions, so I suppose this idea was for a more just world that does not exist.

[notpushkin]

Let’s assume we live in a hypothetical sane society, and company owners and/or directors are responsible for their actions through this entity. When they decide to delegate management to an LLM, wouldn’t they be held accountable for whatever decisions it makes?

[unyttigfjelltol]

Computers are more accountable. You just pull the plug, wipe the system.

Executives, in contrast, require option strike resets and golden parachutes, no accountability.

Neither will tell you they erred or experience contrition, so at a moral level there may well be some equivalency. :D

[deelayman]

I wonder if that quote is still applicable to systems that are hardwired to learn from decision outcomes and new information.

[nilamo]

Management is already never held accountable, so replacing them is a net benefit.

[blibble]

think we're already there aren't we?

no human came out with those tariffs on penguin island

[djwide]

Can anyone tell me why the comment gets downvoted. The article is past character count - I have to link.