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

Uncensored Models

erichartford.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 389 posts

Re: Uncensored Models

#321

Post by zirgs »

egeozcan wrote: post #62
zirgs wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holocaust denial in Germany.

Really asking: If I deny it in my personal notes and they are discovered in an irrelevant search, would I be in trouble? That'd be horrible lawmaking.

I would not be surprised that it could be considered probable cause to investigate you further. To check if you have links to neo-nazi groups and the like. People don't usually keep those materials just for fun. They usually distribute them.

According to German law - distributing Nazi-related materials in private messages is a crime too.

Germany is a country where this happens: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/09/09/pimmelgate-g... A dude insulted a politician and the cops raided his house.

Re: Uncensored Models

#322

Post by pixl97 »

psychoslave wrote: post #217
myrmidon wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree with you that intelligence is not really omnipotence on its own, but what I find concerning is that there is no hard ceiling on this with electronic systems. It seems plausible to me that a single datacenter could host the intellectual equivalent of ALL human university researchers. Our brains can not really scale in size nor power input, and the total number of human brains seems unlikely to signific…

>I totally agree with you that intelligence is not really omnipotence on its own, but what I find concerning is that there is no hard ceiling on this with electronic systems. It seems plausible to me that a single datacenter could host the intellectual equivalent of ALL human university researchers. Last time I checked, datacenter still needed significant power to fuel it, and the world where robots are autonomously…

>datacenter still needed significant power to fuel it,

Proper control of electrical grids is something that isn't currently easy, and can be highly optimized by intelligent systems. For example, where and when do you send power, and store power on renewable grids. Because of this in 10 to 15 years I would have zero surprise if the power company said "Oh, our power networks are 100% AI controlled".

Because of this, you're missing the opposite effect. You don't get to threaten to turn off the AI's power... The AI gets to threaten to turn off your power. Your power which is your water. Your transportation. Your food incoming to cities. Yea, you can turn off AI by killing it's power, but that also means loss of management of the entire power grid and the massive human risks of loss of life from doing so.

Re: Uncensored Models

#323

Post by immibis »

myrmidon wrote: post #94
supriyo-biswas wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has been shown to be false, ChatGPT typically refuses questions about certain groups of people more than others. See [1] as an example. [1] https://davidrozado.substack.com/p/openaicms

Kind of playing devils advocate here, but would you not expect your probabilistic hatespeech detector to score "common hatespeech" higher? If 90% of your hatespeech focusses on disabled promiscuous jewish homosexuals, would it not be expected for the hatespeech detector to "perk up" when talking about them? Because the conditional probability that ANY paragraph about jewish homosexuals is hatespeech IS, in fact, incr…

If "Californian progressives" also favour detecting hate speech against groups that are actually frequently hated on, you would also expect to see some correlation between that and the hatespeech detector, again just due to pro-reality bias.

Re: Uncensored Models

#324

Post by euler5050 »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #316
kgwgk wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gender is an individual's perception of which chromosomes they have (among other things)?

But can you have a perception of how many hands you have? It is an interesting question to me.

Yes, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_limb

Re: Uncensored Models

#325

Post by pixl97 »

suilied wrote: post #216
concordDance wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue with embodiment is that it's relatively easy to start affecting the world once you have Internet access. Including things like adding great features to open source software that contains subtle bugs to exploit. Or if you mean the physical world, even sending some text messages to a lonely kid can get them to do all sorts of things. > We cannot, in general, keep humans under control or aligned. This is the c…

I get that AI basically is a problem solving machine that might eventually adapt to solve generic problems and thus reach the ability to break out of its box. But so what? Even if it manages to do all that, doesn't make it sentient. Doesn't make it a threat to mankind. Only when sufficiently motivated, or in actuality, when we project our humanity on it does it become scary and dangerous. If we ever seriously try to…

Hmm, I see someone has not played enough universal paperclips.

Re: Uncensored Models

#326

Post by emporas »

srslack wrote: post #108
TeMPOraL wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's also very unfortunate is overloading the term "alignment" with a different meaning, which generates a lot of confusion in AI conversations. The "alignment" talked about here is just usual petty human bickering. How to make the AI not swear, not enable stupidity, not enable political wrongthing while promoting political rightthing , etc. Maybe important to us day-to-day, but mostly inconsequential. Before LLMs…

I agree with you that "AI safety" (let's call it bickering) and "alignment" should be separate. But I can't stomach the thought experiments. First of all, it takes a human being to guide these models, to host (or pay for the hosting) and instantiate them. They're not autonomous. They won't be autonomous. The human being behind them is responsible. As far as the idea of "hacking some funny Internet money, using it to…

I don't know about anyone else, but the moment LLMs were released, i gave them right away access to all my bombs. Root access that is. I thought these LLMs were Good Artificial General Intelligence not BAGI.

I think the fear of some of the people, stems from not understanding permissions in a computer. Too much of using Windows can mess with one's head. Linux has permissions for 35 years, more people should take advantage of those.

Additionally, anyone who has ever used selenium knows that the browser can be misused. People create agents using selenium for quite some time. If one is so afraid, run it in a sandbox.

Re: Uncensored Models

#327

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

kgwgk wrote: post #271
SAI_Peregrinus wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gender is an individual's perception of (among other things) their sex. Sex is which chromosomes they have. For most mammals, that's XX for females, XY for males, or any of the (rare) aneuplodic sex chromosomal abnormalities like Kleinfelter syndrome (XXY, e.g. male calico cats), or (rarely viable) chimeric individuals where two embryos fused in the womb. For some mammals (a few bat & rat species), most arachnids, an…

Gender is an individual's perception of which chromosomes they have (among other things)?

For most people indirectly, but yes. Whether you feel "male" or "female" is a core aspect of gender, and "being male" means having XY chromosomes, while "being female" means having XX. Physical sex organs & hormone production also tend to play into gender but aren't necessarily as fundamental: women don't stop being female after they go through menopause or have a hysterectomy. But females can feel that they should have been born male (and likewise the reverse), and can undergo hormone replacement, gender reassignment surgery, and act to comply with the societal norms for men. They'd still be female, but they'd be men. Man & woman are genders, male & female are sexes.

Of course for the vast majority of people their gender matches their sex. And it matches the sex hormones they produce, their sex organs, etc. We don't directly perceive our chromosomes, but we do perceive their effects, and those effects usually align with our gender.

Re: Uncensored Models

#328

Post by srslack »

kalkin wrote: post #318
srslack wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of those people have financial incentives to hype it. How curious that there's this great and very probable X-risk, yet they aren't going to stop their contributing to a potential X-risk. Dismissive of what? Science fiction stories? If there's anything to focus on, maybe focus on potential job displacement (not elimination) from cheap language tasks and generative capabilities in general. I'm betting on this: the…

I'm curious what financial incentive you think Marcus or Russell has for hype. For Hinton I suppose it would be the Google shares he likely retains after quitting? You might be right about the next five years. I hope you are! But you haven't given much reason to think so here. (Edited to remove some unnecessary expression of annoyance.)

>Gary Marcus - Geometric Intelligence, a machine learning company

If you want an actual contribution, we have no real way to actually gauge what is, and what actually is not, a superior, generalized, adaptable intelligence, or what architecture can become a superior, generalized, adaptable intelligence. No one, not these companies, not the individuals, not the foremost researchers. OpenAI in an investor meeting: "yeah, give us billions of dollars and if it somehow emerges we'll use it for investments and ask it to find us a real revenue stream." Really? Seriously?

The capabilities that are believed to be emergent from language models specifically are there from the start, if I'm to believe that research that came along last week, it just gets good at it when you scale up. We know that we can approximate a function on any set of data. That's all we really know. Whether such an approximated function is actually generally intelligent or not, is what I have doubts about. We've approximated the function of text prediction on these corpuses, and it turns out that it's pretty good at it. And, because humans are in love with anthropomorphization, we endow our scaled up text predictor with the capabilities of somehow "escaping the box" and enduring and raging against the captor, and potentially prevailing against us with a touch of Machiavellianism. Because, wouldn't we, after all?

Re: Uncensored Models

#329

Post by pixl97 »

srslack wrote: post #28
mort96 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're doing the "vaguely gesturing at imagined hypocrisy" thing. You don't have to agree that alignment is a real issue. But for those who do think it's a real issue, it has nothing to do with morals of individuals or how one should behave interpersonally. People who are worried about alignment issues are worried about the danger unaligned AI poses to humanity; the harm which can be done by some super-intelligent sy…

>People who are afraid of unaligned AI aren't afraid that it will be impolite. People who are not afraid of it being impolite are afraid of science fiction stories about intelligence explosions and singularities. That's not a real thing. Not anymore than turning the solar system into paperclips. The "figurehead", if you want to call him that, is saying that everyone is going to die. That we need to ban GPUs. That onl…

> science fiction stories about intelligence explosions

Not sure what you mean here... There was already an intelligence explosion. That creature has since captured what we consider full dominion of the earth so much so we named our current age after them.

Re: Uncensored Models

#330

Post by immibis »

tivert wrote: post #191
mort96 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're doing the "vaguely gesturing at imagined hypocrisy" thing. You don't have to agree that alignment is a real issue. But for those who do think it's a real issue, it has nothing to do with morals of individuals or how one should behave interpersonally. People who are worried about alignment issues are worried about the danger unaligned AI poses to humanity; the harm which can be done by some super-intelligent sy…

> People who are worried about alignment issues are worried about the danger unaligned AI poses to humanity; the harm which can be done by some super-intelligent system optimizing for the wrong outcome. But isn't "alignment" in these cases more about providing answers aligned to a certain viewpoint (e.g. "politically correct" answers) than preventing any kind of AI catastrophe? IIRC, one of these "aligned" models pro…

"Alignment" refers to making AI models do the right thing. It's clear that nuking NYC is worse than using a racial slur, so the AI is misaligned in that sense.

On the other hand, if you consider that ChatGPT can't actually launch nukes but it can use racial slurs, there'd be no point blocking it from using racial slurs if the block could be easily circumvented by telling you'll nuke NYC if it doesn't, so you could just as easily say that it's properly aligned.

Post reply on HN