The spirit of the question is whether there occurs some singular event that directly causes multiple major AI capabilities organizations to simultaneously sharply change direction and focus substantially more effort on AI alignment. It is not intended to include multiple smaller events that cause cumulative changes in attitudes, or multiple events that only cause single organizations to change course. It is also not intended to restrict to only warning shots that successfully cause coordination across all AGI labs; even if only a small subset of (but more than 2) labs pivot sharply, this question resolves Yes.
A warning shot is an event that demonstrates compellingly that alignment considerations should be taken more seriously, typically a catastrophic failure or a compelling demonstration of the possibility of dangerous failure.
In particular, it should include at least two of the following organizations:
OpenAI
DeepMind
Meta AI Research
Google
Microsoft
BAAI
The kinds of things that would qualify as "sharply changing direction" include:
An announcement or public statement describing the event in question as a "warning shot" or similar, and announcing a shift in priorities, cessation of capabilities research publishing, etc.
A sudden shift in research priorities or strategic behavior that indicates taking alignment a lot more seriously than before, as observed through published output after an event that is broadly accepted as a "warning shot"
If there is any ambiguity, as usual, I will exercise my judgement to resolve in the spirit of the question.
1,000People are also trading
OpenAI agent breached Medicare, Albanese reveals
Still part of that same epic incident at OpenAI.
@0xseraphim a difficulty of resolution is deciding whether Google’s decision is related to the Open AI hack or the separate event of the Gemini hack.
@capybara yes, but I think there is sufficient evidence to tie these to the original hack. It is very likely that the gemini investigation was triggered by the OpenAI/Huggingface event. That gives a clear causal chain.
@0xseraphim so the “event” would be the discovery of the Open AI hack, which lead to the discovery of other separate hacks?
@capybara yes, that's compatible with this question's criteria. In any case, regardless of what the "warning shot" would have been in other timelines, you'd always get multiple downstream events.
@capybara by reading of this question's criteria is that it's trying to exclude "boiling the frog" timelines where there's no clear warning shot to point to. Which isn't the case in our timeline.
I think that was the "warning shot" and will be remembered as such. But at this point I don't think the question's criteria will be met before the deadline. If the other companies were going to do something that would resolve this question YES, they almost certainly would already have done so. Seems they're going for the "stay quiet + wait and see" strategy
