Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

goodfire.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#31

Post by echelon »

Rastonbury wrote: post #29
echelon wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more the public has access to these tools, the more they'll develop useful scar tissue and muscle memory. We need people to be constantly exposed to bots so that they understand the new nature of digital information. When the automobile was developed, we had to train kids not to play in the streets. We didn't put kids or cars in bubbles. When photoshop came out, we developed a vernacular around edited images. "Ph…

Counter point the number of supposedly educated people falling into social media echo chambers parroting partisan views, sharing on ramps, recommending supplements. They obviously do not see the harm, if fact they feel superior, feeling the need to educate and lecture. The vector here was social media, the vector here is reliance on chatbots. I mildly trust the big player like Anthropic and even OpenAI, but imagine t…

I feel my response here [1] also applies to you.

People are going to do these things anyway. We've had "yellow journalism" since the 1800s. It's a tale as old as time.

What right do we have to go around policing other people's minds?

When I grew up, the Internet was an escape from the puritanical censorship of the southern baptists I was surrounded with. It was a bastion of free information and idea exchange. If the prevailing ethos of the 2000s wasn't so anti-censorship, I wouldn't have gotten outside of my own filter bubble and found a way to explore other ideas. I would have been chased away as an undesirable member of the opposition and muted, censored, and banned. Thank god the algorithm didn't exist back then.

The things we do to each other in today's internet are abhorrent. Both sides of the political spectrum attempt to constrain what the other side can do. We need to stop that. It's petty and increases polarization. And that's exactly what's happening with your suggestion - you're wanting to censor ideas and things you don't like that presumably this technology will be used to promote.

Please stop thinking LLMs are an agent of the enemy to convert more people to their causes. The opposite is also true. And the impact won't be as extreme or dire as you make it out to be - heaven forbid people buy more vitamins. Oh, the humanity.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42499972

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#32

Post by echelon »

ed wrote: post #20
echelon wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more the public has access to these tools, the more they'll develop useful scar tissue and muscle memory. We need people to be constantly exposed to bots so that they understand the new nature of digital information. When the automobile was developed, we had to train kids not to play in the streets. We didn't put kids or cars in bubbles. When photoshop came out, we developed a vernacular around edited images. "Ph…

Early traffic laws were actually created in response to child pedestrian deaths (7000 in 1925). https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2022-06-10/how-citie...

Of course. The point I was making is that in the 19th century, roads were multifunctional spaces shared by merchants, horses, carts, wagons, playing children, performers, etc.

The introduction of the automobile kicked all of these use cases off of the roads. While pedestrians have the right of way, the roads henceforth belonged to the "devil wagons".

We also started to shift blame over to pedestrians for jaywalking. They no longer own the roads.

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#33

Post by cbg0 »

echelon wrote: post #30
imiric wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your analogies don't quite align with this technology. We've had exposure to propaganda and disinformation for many decades, long before the internet became their primary medium, yet people don't learn to become immune to them. They're more effective now than they've ever been, and AI tools will only make them more so. Arguing that more exposure will somehow magically solve these problems is delusional at best, and d…

> vouching for less regulations and more exposure is simply irresponsible. We let people buy 6,000 pound vehicles capable of traveling 100+ mph. We let people buy sharp knives and guns. And heat their homes with flammable gas. And hike up dangerous tall mountains. I think the LLM is the least of society's worries and this pervasive thinking that everything needs to be wrapped up in bubble wrap is what is actually dan…

Quite a lot of whataboutisms and straw men in your post, let's stick to LLMs, as that was the original topic.

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#34

Post by echelon »

cbg0 wrote: post #33
echelon wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> vouching for less regulations and more exposure is simply irresponsible. We let people buy 6,000 pound vehicles capable of traveling 100+ mph. We let people buy sharp knives and guns. And heat their homes with flammable gas. And hike up dangerous tall mountains. I think the LLM is the least of society's worries and this pervasive thinking that everything needs to be wrapped up in bubble wrap is what is actually dan…

Quite a lot of whataboutisms and straw men in your post, let's stick to LLMs, as that was the original topic.

It's contextualization, not a logical fallacy.

Let's stop treating LLMs as spooky.

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#36

Post by imiric »

echelon wrote: post #30
imiric wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your analogies don't quite align with this technology. We've had exposure to propaganda and disinformation for many decades, long before the internet became their primary medium, yet people don't learn to become immune to them. They're more effective now than they've ever been, and AI tools will only make them more so. Arguing that more exposure will somehow magically solve these problems is delusional at best, and d…

> vouching for less regulations and more exposure is simply irresponsible. We let people buy 6,000 pound vehicles capable of traveling 100+ mph. We let people buy sharp knives and guns. And heat their homes with flammable gas. And hike up dangerous tall mountains. I think the LLM is the least of society's worries and this pervasive thinking that everything needs to be wrapped up in bubble wrap is what is actually dan…

There's a vast middle ground between completely unregulated technology and an Orwellian state. Let's not entertain absolutes.

> We let people buy 6,000 pound vehicles capable of traveling 100+ mph.

> We let people buy sharp knives and guns. And heat their homes with flammable gas. And hike up dangerous tall mountains.

All of those have regulations around them, and people have gotten familiar with how they work. More importantly, they're hardly disrupting to our lives as AI technology has the potential to be.

We didn't invent airplanes and let people on them overnight. It took decades for the airline industry to form, and even more for flights to be accepted as a standard form of transportation. We created strict regulations that plane manufacturers and airlines must follow, which were refined over the 20th century.

Was this unnecessary and Orwellian? Obviously the dangers of flight were very clear, so we took precautions to ensure the necessary safety. With AI, these dangers are not that clear.

> If you want to criminalize illegal use of LLMs for fraud, then do that. But don't make the technology inaccessible and patronize people by telling them they're not smart enough to understand the danger.

It's far from patronizing; it's just reality. People don't understand the dangers of the modern internet either, yet they're subjects of privacy violations, identity theft, scams, and all sorts of psychological manipulation from advertising and propaganda that influences how they think, vote and behave in society. Democratic institutions are crumbling, sociopolitical tensions are the highest they've been in the past 30 years in most western countries, and yet you would be fine with unleashing a technology that has a high chance of making this worse? Without any guardrails, or even some time for humanity to start addressing some of the existential questions I mentioned in my previous post? Again, this would be highly irresponsible and dangerous.

And yet I'm sure that's what's going to happen in most countries. It's people who think like you that are pushing this technology forward, and unfortunately they have a strong influence over governments and the zeitgeist. I just hope that we can eventually climb out of the hole we're currently digging ourselves into.

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#37

Post by stavros »

lukeramsden wrote: post #35

Why are AI researchers constantly handicapping everything they do under the guise of ""safety""? It's a bag of data and some math algorithms that generate text....

> It's a bag of data and some math algorithms that generate text....

I agree with the general premise of too much "safety", but this argument is invalid. Humans are bags of meat and they can do some pretty terrible things.

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#38

Post by UltraSane »

lukeramsden wrote: post #35

Why are AI researchers constantly handicapping everything they do under the guise of ""safety""? It's a bag of data and some math algorithms that generate text....

What if an AI model could tell you exactly how to modify a common virus to kill 50% of everyone it infects?

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#39

Post by ben_w »

lukeramsden wrote: post #35

Why are AI researchers constantly handicapping everything they do under the guise of ""safety""? It's a bag of data and some math algorithms that generate text....

> It's a bag of data and some math algorithms that generate text....

That describes almost every web server.

To the extent that this particular maths produces text that causes political, financial, or legal harms to their interests, this kind of testing is just like any other accepting testing.

To the extent that the maths is "like a human", even in the vaguest and most general sense of "like", then it is also good to make sure that the human it's like isn't a sadistic psychopath — we don't know how far we are from "like" by any standard, because we don't know what we're doing, so this is playing it safe even if we're as far from this issue as cargo-cults were from functioning radios.

Re: Show HN: Llama 3.3 70B Sparse Autoencoders with API access

#40

Post by cornholio »

lukeramsden wrote: post #35

Why are AI researchers constantly handicapping everything they do under the guise of ""safety""? It's a bag of data and some math algorithms that generate text....

> Why are AI researchers constantly handicapping everything

Career and business self-preservation in a social media neurotic world. It doesn't take much to trigger the outrage machine and cancel every future prospect you might have, especially in a very competitive field flush with other "clean" applicants.

Just look at the whole "AI racism" fustercluck for a small taste.

Post reply on HN