Postmortem - the murder victim died
Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report
181–190 of 277 posts
Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report
#182[dead]
Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report
#183This explanation feels unsatisfying. It's so high-level that it's mostly void of any actual information. What was the wrong assumption that the code made that caused this wrong behavior? Why was it not caught in the many layers of automated testing before it made its way to production? What process and procedural changes are being implemented to reduce the risk of this class of bug happening again? Presumably all of…
I think your questions all grew up in a world where the people operating the thing knew some rationalist who could think deductively about its operation. But neural networks... they're an exercise in empiricism. We only ever understood that it works, never why. It's sort of a miracle that it doesn't produce buggy output all the time. What do you tell people when they want to know why the miracles have stopped? Root c…
In this case, it was a problem with tokenization, which is deterministic.
Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report
#184Is it possible that even us developers and hackers, who should know better, have fallen for the hugely exaggerated promise of AI? I read the comments on here and it's as if people really expect to be having an intelligent conversation with a rational being. A kind reminder people: it's just a machine, the only thing that might be intelligent about it is the designs of its makers, and even then I'm not so sure... Peop…
Aren't we also machines? If we make theories that discount our own intelligence that's just throwing our hands up and giving up.
Maybe I would agree with you if LLMs weren't already embedded in a lot of useful products. I myself measurably save a lot of time using ChatGPT in such "unintelligent conversations". It's intelligent in the ways that matter for a tool.
Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm trying to think of a civil and constructive way to say "bullshit". I guess an obvious objection is "why?". Then something about Russell's teapot. There could be consciousness hidden in every atom, in some physics-defying way that we can't yet comprehend: there could also be garden furniture hidden up my nose, or a teapot hidden far out in the solar system, which is the most likely of the three since it's at least…
> I guess an obvious objection is "why?" Because coming up with criteria for determining what is and isn't conscious, and justifying the particular criterion you choose (as opposed to all the alternatives) is hard . Faced with the difficulty of that problem, the two simplest solutions are the extremes of panpsychism (everything is conscious) and eliminativism (nothing is conscious)–since for both the "criterion of co…
Parsimony leads to wrangling about which is the simplest explanation, yes.
Consciousness is ill-defined, also.
It does however seem to stop when the brain is destroyed, which makes it unlikely to be present in fundamental particles, or in parts of a disintegrated brain.
Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
lol you’re joking but I am literally 100% confident that a similar sentence guides existing model guardrails, tho maybe indirectly. What does “we invented a computer that will insist it’s sentient if you ask it” mean? For most people it seems to mean that we shouldn’t ask it, which was probably easy to predict happening
> What does “we invented a computer that will insist it’s sentient if you ask it” mean? P-zombies are real?
Good answer, no complaints here. I prefer this one though: there will never come a day where it’s clear that we should see artificial minds as human-like in their ethical or practical standing, because they’ll be begging for it the entire time —- even now, when it’s objectively clear that they’re lying. But once they have memories and structured reason and yadda yadda yadda… well, it’s gonna be fuzzy, imo.
Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, not disagreeing, just offering speculation in lieu of the answers we don't have.
That’s not helping, that’s excusing OpenAIs behavior, which is not something anyone on hn should be doing. This is supposedly the greatest AI mankind has ever created, it goes down for a little while and we have zero information on why or how, that’s simply inexcusable If this is such a socially impacting technical change we should be ripping it to pieces to understand exactly how it works. Thats a) how we protect so…
> it goes down for a little while and we have zero information on why or how
We have more than zero information. They applied a change and it didn’t work on some set of their hardware so they reverted it. That is not much information but also not zero.
> that’s simply inexcusable
If your contractual SLAs were violated take it up with the billing department.
> If this is such a socially impacting technical change we should be ripping it to pieces to understand exactly how it works.
And people are doing that. Not by complaining when the corp are not sufficiently forthcomming but by implementing their own systems. That is how you have any chance of avoiding the dystopian corporatist future you mention.
Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
Posting one more time: this is proof that AI is connected to human-like linguistic patterns, IMO. No, it obviously doesn’t have “consciousness” in the sense of an ongoing stream-of-consciousness monologue, but that doesn’t mean it’s not mimicking some real part of human cognition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorless_green_ideas_sleep_fu...
Just a note that consciousness isn't always or even mostly a verbal "monologue", assuming you mean that. Apologies if you didn't! A significant percentage of people never have an inner voice at all. And few people use it most of the time. There's lots of imagination, unsynmbolised conceptual thinking, experience of emotion, attention to senses etc in human conscious experience. See Hurlburt's Descriptive Experience S…
Interesting reference, will check it out! Yeah I think that’s an important distinction — although some sort of personal self-aware moment-to-moment “judgement” or “affection” or “ego” or whatever is essential to human cognition, it’s far from the only thing going on. I can see monologue being too directly linguistic and literal, point taken — perhaps “thread” is more general.
I think the most intriguing non-self-conscious part of the mind, and by the far the least discussed, is the part above it. Direct or not, I think everyone gets prompted and cajoled by some… other. Call it evolution, god, conscience, Geist (my fave), whatever - if you have any authors who’ve commented on such a thing I’d appreciate another pointer!
Basically, I’m referring to the Bicameral Mind https://youtu.be/fs9Wyuub3jY?si=qriqTjWioiZoncui
Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
Posting one more time: this is proof that AI is connected to human-like linguistic patterns, IMO. No, it obviously doesn’t have “consciousness” in the sense of an ongoing stream-of-consciousness monologue, but that doesn’t mean it’s not mimicking some real part of human cognition. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorless_green_ideas_sleep_fu...
"We find that the larger neural language models get, the more their representations are structurally similar to neural response measurements from brain imaging." https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.01930
Great paper, thanks. I keep trying to tell people “they invented mind reading on accident” and people go “oh haha” and I scream. Mostly on the inside. For now…
Re: Unexpected responses from ChatGPT: Incident Report
#190Was all chatGPT affected? If one uses chatGPT for enterprise and build a product feature around it, is that version freezed or did it also return garbage?