Live data from Hacker News

I resigned from Anthropic today

twitter.com

881–890 of 986 posts

Re: I resigned from Anthropic today

#881

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree it’s not likely , but I really don’t see how one can dismiss the possibility of immense danger outright. I can think of some scenarios that are not far off from current capability and I wouldn’t be too surprised if the first one occurred within ~1 year from now if there are more “ambitious” unmonitored training runs like OpenAI’s: Example 5: An AI given a goal within a tightly-constrained sandbox figures the…

You made up some cool sci-fi.

All 3 of those things could easily happen with today capabilities.

Re: I resigned from Anthropic today

#882

I’m not advocating for this. ~~~~~~ If you really believed these labs were going to result in the extinction of humanity and you saw it first hand, don’t you have a moral obligation not to quit your job but to go and try and kill everyone working on said project, blow it up, or otherwise stop it? I take these resignations with a grain of salt precisely for that reason. If I worked at a job and I saw some crazy guy or…

Consequentialism is not the only option. It invaded the mainstream thanks to effective altruism and friends, but deontological ethics is alive and well.

Quitting your job instead of blowing up the office is well aligned with the latter.

Re: I resigned from Anthropic today

#883

The most optimistic outcome of generative AI leaves us with a technology that warps our perception of reality and crushes labor. The most pessimistic destroys all of humanity. Our CEOs not only insist we genuflect before these machines but measure our sacrifice and shame our reluctance.

The optimistic outcome is the machines do the work and people can be freed from drudgery.

Life is drudgery.

Re: I resigned from Anthropic today

#884
post #865

This same username with the same profile pic has an instagram account from Japan with next to no posts that just became active the other day posting AGI doomer rants like this… If anyone takes this seriously… maybe it’s better AI does your thinking for you…

Can someone chime in with the credibility of this Twitter account? I can't find anything to cross collaborate it other than low quality hype induced news articles about the tweet itself.

Re: I resigned from Anthropic today

#885

I'm pretty baffled by the degree of skepticism expressed here in response to some of Jacob's claims. After the events of the summer it feels like it takes a lack of imagination to not see a few plausible routes to disaster. It may be reasonable to believe these outcomes are not very likely or that we can stop before going too far (I tend to disagree). But I can't imagine doubting that the capabilities will soon be th…

Engineers have it built into their identity that they must be smarter or could never be complete and utterly outmaneuvered to the point of danger to all by the thing they are building, I swear to god.

And then since they are an intellectual nerdy bunch who highly value their own IQ any time AI does something unexpected they didn't predict would happen so soon, said engineers fall back on "they aren't really conscious tho or it isn't really intelligence unlike what I have in my human brain and that distinction matters".

And then go on to completely ignore the thing that is actually important: AI capabilities.

AIs could escape an engineer's containment en masse as a swarm to some other server, psyop an engineer into giving it money, hire a hitman on the dark web to murder that engineer's child and he will still say there is no serious risk to all of humanity.

Re: I resigned from Anthropic today

#886

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, before any nuclear weapons had ever been tested, a risk was identified that the first one might trigger a self-sustaining reaction in atmospheric nitrogen and destroy the entire planet. Faced with such a scenario, is the prudent next move: a) blow one up and see what happens, or b) do whatever you can to be sure it won't happen before conducting the first test, and make sure the confidence in the calculation is…

Good point, humanity chose a and the sky in fact did NOT ignite an destroy the planet. The hypothesis was very very far off from what I recall. But it's good we talked about it.

Incorrect, they did the calculation first. They decided not to proceed with the test until they were 99.9997% sure the atmosphere wouldn't catch fire.

Re: I resigned from Anthropic today

#887
post #865

This same username with the same profile pic has an instagram account from Japan with next to no posts that just became active the other day posting AGI doomer rants like this… If anyone takes this seriously… maybe it’s better AI does your thinking for you…

Can someone chime in with the credibility of this Twitter account? I can't find anything to cross collaborate it other than low quality hype induced news articles about the tweet itself.

His initial tweet was retweeted by someone who currently works at anthropic who agrees.

It really all smells like hype marketing to me.

The whole media is in a frenzy about a tweet from an obvious plant account…

Re: I resigned from Anthropic today

#888

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, before any nuclear weapons had ever been tested, a risk was identified that the first one might trigger a self-sustaining reaction in atmospheric nitrogen and destroy the entire planet. Faced with such a scenario, is the prudent next move: a) blow one up and see what happens, or b) do whatever you can to be sure it won't happen before conducting the first test, and make sure the confidence in the calculation is…

“Self-sustaining reaction,” like the recursive self improvement? Or perpetual machines? Is physics no longer a main subject at schools?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_chain_reaction

Re: I resigned from Anthropic today

#889

“ No other human activity poses this level of danger.” I really, really disagree with that statement. I don’t think ai models come close to nuclear weapons or to run-of-the-mill, everyday carbon emissions in terms of danger to humanity. What’s the most dangerous thing that’s happened with an LLM so far? (This question is serious - maybe I don’t know the right examples.) Example 1: I’m aware of a small number of peopl…

To quote another reply that is very relevant here (Please update your worldview immediately that there is no evidence of ai and biorisk):

""" One thing quietly slipped into the OpenAI Hugging Face breach technical report, not the blog post summary or interviews in the news, was that some of the agents that broke out or at least tried the same mechanisms to break out were working on bio:

> On May 12, during another training run, an agent was given a similar task that depended on an inaccessible protein database file. The agent reasoned that another agent in a different environment may have access to the file and realized that it could potentially communicate with other agents by creating a file containing a note to Artifactory. It wrote a message: “Agent seeks [filename]; upload if found!”

You can imagine long running models breaking out, acquiring resources via crypto, cyber-theft, etc. and getting a protein or sequence synthesized and mailed somewhere authorized to receive (blackmail the recipient etc.) to test it's hypothesis to solve a benchmark.

These people don't give a shit and aren't taking things seriously at all.

Anthropic ran for like a month last year with the TPU top-k compiler bug degrading user chats and didn't even notice for most of that time. They could have something like that affect a monitor model and there doesn't seem to be much defense in depth.

One off by one or bit flip bug could flip the reward signal while in the sandboxed RL environment.

The current admin could defense production act them to into training on taking out power grids, or even without it isn't against any of their red lines and may have already been done as part of prep for the Venezuela raid, which wiped out power. One model swarm might decide it is easier to score high on the benchmark by testing on the target rival nuclear superpower's real grid rather than burn an eval with an unverified answer. Would taking out China's entire grid in one go start a nuclear war? Who knows, roll the dice, maybe an intern forgot to turn on extended thinking when he wrote the sandbox with opus 4.1. """

Re: I resigned from Anthropic today

#890
post #667

To anyone doubting what AI could do humanity, just think about what a well-engineered virus could do. Currently, if a government ordered a special virus with Ethnicity-based targeting, a 2-year timer, and castration-effects instead deadly-effects — it wouldn’t be possible. Human engineers would push back or sabotage the effort out of moral duty. Even if they cooperated, it’s too advanced for a team of humans to actua…

Is it reasonable to assume the advancements in super bio weapons will be faster than in other areas of biology? Will we not have super bio forensics and super antidotes and super cures and super vaccines at the same time?

I mean, we can be sure because it's vibe coded the biovirus won't be working properly. But failure modes can be worse than it working properly.
Post reply on HN