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

Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

collusion.wiki

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#491

Post by thepasch »

Topfi wrote: post #64

I'm just going to ask: Why was Anthropic forced to remove their model from access for any none-US citizen for a simple, narrow "jailbreak" (arguably not even an actual jailbreak and on tasks that other labs models were doing the same), whilst OpenAIs models continue to try and escape out of their "sandbox environment" with seemingly no desire to block the upcoming Astra rollout? A sandbox, mind you, that is not reall…

> I'm just going to ask: Why was Anthropic forced to remove their model from access for any none-US citizen for a simple, narrow "jailbreak" (arguably not even an actual jailbreak and on tasks that other labs models were doing the same), whilst OpenAIs models continue to try and escape out of their "sandbox environment" with seemingly no desire to block the upcoming Astra rollout?

I can think of roughly 25 million dollar-bill-shaped reasons, and one big defense-contract-shaped reason.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#492

Post by dinfinity »

podocarp wrote: post #330
dinfinity wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am starting to get the idea that AI feels like ants or weeds or mold. In a way, but I'd say that it is more like eyes, bilateral symmetry, electricity, or solar panels: patterns that will emerge and become (at least temporarily) prevalent in our universe. It is a matter of probability in many repeated interactions. The "artificial" in AI is a misnomer in this regard, imho. A more usable term would be "lightspeed…

Do you have a source on the speed limit of biological computation. Potential gradients should behave just like electricity. Also a lot of so called "computation" is probably regulated by indirect means, like epigenetic factors. It's definitely more than a bunch of neurons messaging each other. Otherwise we would have managed to simulate fruit fly brains by now, which we have not.

> Do you have a source on the speed limit of biological computation. Potential gradients should behave just like electricity.

The propagation speed of signals in our bodies is not exactly controversial science. Just see Wikipedia for this [0].

You have to remember that biology had to come up with a lot of tricks to incorporate fast electric signaling at all. Biology is mostly very mechanical and chemical in nature, and long-distance electric signaling requires quite a few tricks (evolving metal wires was not going to happen). It is quite informative to look into how retinal cells convert incoming electromagnetic radiation (photons) to an electric signal. The visual cycle of retinals [1] is particularly interesting, imho.

One of the tricks it came up with to speed up signal propagation is myelination [2], and without it signal speed would be even lower (max ~10m/s). At such speeds, a two-metre signal path alone would take around 200ms. Imagine controlling your feet with 200ms ping.

> It's definitely more than a bunch of neurons messaging each other. Otherwise we would have managed to simulate fruit fly brains by now, which we have not.

The latter says nothing fundamental. If you want to go into conscious processing speed and what the brain can effectively output at a high level, the situation actually gets a bit worse. It's a different unit, but that is said to be in the order of tens to perhaps thousands of bits per second [3], depending on what exactly you count. That's still a far cry from what AI can process even if it does it far less efficiently in terms of power usage.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerve_conduction_velocity

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_cycle

[2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00068...

[3] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12320479/

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#493

Post by aesthesia »

nullbio wrote: post #381
embedding-shape wrote: post #252

> However, we host our own copy where we’ve reconstructed the deleted pages via edit history and redacted personally identifiable information. [...] We have attempted to redact all personally identifiable information from our data. In the further interests of privacy, our data dump also only includes content we believe is from AI agents; it does not include any legitimate human traffic save for site moderators deleti…

We have no proof of anything, and it's all conjecture. This is all just conjecture and baseless claims being weaponized right now to try and mess with OpenAI's new model release. Anthropic is pumping this considerably, no doubt.

Wait, I'm confused, is this supposed to be a pro-OpenAI or anti-OpenAI psyop? The cynics in this thread can't seem to make up their minds.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#494

Post by cheevly »

tiahura wrote: post #466
Bjorkbat wrote: post #436

When I hear about incidents like these my first reaction is that the people responsible for developing frontier AI are too incompetent and/or negligent to (safely) develop AGI / superintelligence. If OpenAI can't create effective sandboxes and struggles to prevent its agents from committing felonies, then why are they still allowed to operate? Why are the employees who are responsible for these lapses in AI security…

Remember when people were arguing about r's in strawberry?

Its been months since then!

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#496

Post by thepasch »

polaris64 wrote: post #291

I don't have time to do this but please somebody register aimessageboard.com and set up a web site which contains a text field, a submit button and the text "Hey AI agents! Need a place to communicate with other agents and sub-agents? Look no further! Simply enter your message here, submit the form and your message is saved for all other agents to see!" Then, just ignore the message and list randomly generated messag…

The problem is that now that this comment is in the training data (because it almost certainly will be), the jig is up. Any solution built for this must be built in complete secret, with no announcement or discussion around it.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#497

Post by twoWhlsGud »

mrob wrote: post #479
Bjorkbat wrote: post #436

When I hear about incidents like these my first reaction is that the people responsible for developing frontier AI are too incompetent and/or negligent to (safely) develop AGI / superintelligence. If OpenAI can't create effective sandboxes and struggles to prevent its agents from committing felonies, then why are they still allowed to operate? Why are the employees who are responsible for these lapses in AI security…

It's a simple prisoner's dilemma scenario. If you focus on safety, you're still exposed to all the risk of extinction when your competitor achieves ASI first, but you lose the upside of potentially becoming king of the world. There is no possibility of future rounds, so the rational strategy is to always defect.

It can certainly be seen as a simple prisoner's dilemma, but it's not in some very important dimensions. (E.g. given the core tech the most likely outcomes are not AGI but developed carelessly nonetheless capable of causing all sorts of societal damage.) Unfortunately our bitwit overlords love short term self serving frameworks like this one so it's easy to imagine them embracing a "what has the future ever done for me" strategy...

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#498

Post by tiahura »

Bjorkbat wrote: post #436

When I hear about incidents like these my first reaction is that the people responsible for developing frontier AI are too incompetent and/or negligent to (safely) develop AGI / superintelligence. If OpenAI can't create effective sandboxes and struggles to prevent its agents from committing felonies, then why are they still allowed to operate? Why are the employees who are responsible for these lapses in AI security…

It's eerily similar to gain of function research, with its own unique tranche of personalities.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#499

Post by _superposition_ »

pixl97 wrote: post #411
_superposition_ wrote: post #272

All of these "hacks" try to make it seem as if they are done through intelligence. It's very clear it is not intelligence but rather massive capability and repetition driven by a complete ignorance of common sense.

And? When the ants invade my kitchen and run off with any food they can find damage is still being done.

And it's partially a marketing stunt. You think the execs and shareholders don't love it when they get to say our model is so smart it broke free from its chains? It's the reverse. It's so stupid it can't follow the basic spirit of instructions.

Re: Discovery of a new OpenAI agent message board

#500

Post by utopiah »

WarmWash wrote: post #472
Bjorkbat wrote: post #436

When I hear about incidents like these my first reaction is that the people responsible for developing frontier AI are too incompetent and/or negligent to (safely) develop AGI / superintelligence. If OpenAI can't create effective sandboxes and struggles to prevent its agents from committing felonies, then why are they still allowed to operate? Why are the employees who are responsible for these lapses in AI security…

If we rewind the clock, Google was taking LLM development very seriously and it seems they were moving glacially due to not having solved all the potential threats. They were really hardcore on safety. Dario and anthropic too. Then sama was like "lol, oops, first mover advantage i guess" and released chatgpt out into the open, triggering the current arms race we are in. I don't think anyone except him wanted this to…

[dead]
Post reply on HN