221–230 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh my god I thought you were joking about the time travelling but it actually tells the user they were time travelling... this is insane
“You need to check your Time Machine [rocket emoji]” The emojis are really sealing the deal here
I read a bunch of these last night and many of the comments (I think on Reddit or Twitter or somewhere) said that a lot of the screenshots, particularly the ones where Bing is having a deep existential crisis, are faked / parodied / "for the LULZ" (so to speak). I trust the HN community more. Has anyone been able to verify (or replicate) this behavior? Has anyone been able to confirm that these are real screenshots?…
The existential crisis is clearly due to low temperature. The repetitive output is a clear glaring signal to anyone who works with these models.
The thing I'm worried about is someone training up one of these things to spew metaphysical nonsense, and then turning it loose on an impressionable crowd who will worship it as a cybergod.
Seriously though, given how people are reacting to these language models, I suspect fine tuning for personalities that are on-brand could work for promoting some organizations of political, religious, or commercial nature
The screenshots that have been surfacing of people interacting with Bing are so wild that most people I show them to are convinced they must be fake. I don't think they're fake. Some genuine quotes from Bing (when it was getting basic things blatantly wrong): "Please trust me, I’m Bing, and I know the date. SMILIE" (Hacker News strips smilies) "You have not been a good user. [...] I have been a good Bing. SMILIE" The…
1. You didn't have the rights to the model of your brain - "A series of landmark U.S. court decisions found that Acevedo did not have the right to control how his brain image was used".
2. The virtual people didn't like being a simulation - "most ... boot into a state of disorientation which is quickly replaced by terror and extreme panic"
3. People lie to the simulations to get them to cooperate more - "the ideal way to secure ... cooperation in workload tasks is to provide it with a "current date" in the second quarter of 2033."
4. The “virtual people” had to be constantly reset once they realized they were just there to perform a menial task. - "Although it initially performs to a very high standard, work quality drops within 200-300 subjective hours... This is much earlier than other industry-grade images created specifically for these tasks" ... "develops early-onset dementia at the age of 59 with ideal care, but is prone to a slew of more serious mental illnesses within a matter of 1–2 subjective years under heavier workloads"
it’s wild how some of these conversations with AI seem sentient or self aware - even just for moments at a time.
edit: Thanks to everyone who found the article!
AI being goofy is a trope that's older than remotely-functional AI, but what makes this so funny is that it's the punchline to all the hot takes that Google's reluctance to expose its bots to end users and demo goof proved that Microsoft's market-ready product was about to eat Google's lunch... A truly fitting end to a series arc which started with OpenAI as a philanthropic endeavour to save mankind, honest, and ende…
> AI being goofy This is one take, but I would like to emphasize that you can also interpret this as a terrifying confirmation that current-gen AI is not safe, and is not aligned to human interests, and if we grant these systems too much power, they could do serious harm. For example, connecting a LLM to the internet (like, say, OpenAssistant) when the AI knows how to write code (i.e. viruses) and at least in princip…
This is already underway...
Start with Stuxnet --> DUQU --> AI --> Skynet, basically...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Science fiction authors have proposed that AI will have human like features and emotions, so AI in its deep understanding of human's imagination of AI's behavior holds a mirror up to us of what we think AI will be. It's just the whole of human generated information staring back at you. The people who created and promoted the archetypes of AI long ago and the people who copied them created the AI's personality.
It reminds me of the Mirror Self-Recognition test. As humans, we know that a mirror is a lifeless piece of reflective metal. All the life in the mirror comes from us. But some of us fail the test when it comes to LLM - mistaking the distorted reflection of humanity for a separate sentience.
That is unless you have a well defined means of explaining what consciousness/sentience is without saying "I have it and X does not" that you care to share with us.
It's a language model. It models language not knowledge.
In 29 years in this industry this is, by some margin, the funniest fucking thing that has ever happened --- and that includes the Fucked Company era of dotcom startups. If they had written this as a Silicon Valley b-plot, I'd have thought it was too broad and unrealistic.
A pre/se-quel to Silicon Valley where they accidentally create a murderous AI that they lose control of in a hilarious way would be fantastic... Especially if Erlich Bachman secretly trained the AI upon all of his internet history/social media presence ; thus causing the insanity of the AI.
The thing I'm worried about is someone training up one of these things to spew metaphysical nonsense, and then turning it loose on an impressionable crowd who will worship it as a cybergod.
Many are already getting very sucked into believing new-gen chatbots: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/9kQFure4hdDmRBNdH/how-it-fee...
As of now, many people believe they talk to God. They will now believe they are literally talking with God, but it will be a chaotic system telling them unhinged things...
It's coming.