501–510 of 529 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>it really amazes me how fearless Deepseek are Reel it in a bit, man.
The circle jerking of Chinese models on this site never ceases to amuse me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> welfare We should be paying attention to it just in case it ends up mattering enormously. It's cheap insurance. Aside from that, US labs' system cards have been pretty useless for a while—I think the last great one was the combined system card for Claude 4 Sonnet and Opus.
Yup, alignment doesn’t sound that interesting until you’re getting chased around by the Terminator.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are distilling from other models (according to Anthropic reports they are [1]), there are probably a bunch of things that you can just do away with. [1] https://www.anthropic.com/news/detecting-and-preventing-dist...
That's one of the reasons why you should never trust a single word from Anthropic and OpenAI (Sam Altman also blamed them back in the day of R1, in a pretty convenient moment). If you know anything about Claude, DeepSeek, jailbreaking, and distillation, you know the claims are clearly bullshit and the models are nothing alike, and forensic attempts agree, in fact there just was another one [1] [2]. Meanwhile, DeepSee…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A stab: a video recording of a biological organism can exhibit many markers that would indicate consciousness if observed in a biological organism.
I like it, and it points in the right direction, but is not directly true: The markers are about interactions, how biological organisms behave in certain test situations. But it speaks to the central question: Are the tests adequate? Or are they measuring some proxy of what we really care about, and LLMs are merely imitating consciousness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me it reads like pure propaganda. Anthropic really wants us to think that they've made something sentient. I think that's really dangerous.
What's your definition of sentient? Or, maybe more precisely, consciousness? I think it's reasonable to at least start thinking about these questions. It has long been established that LLMs have good theory of mind [1]. And there is a bunch of empirical research about all sorts of capabilities that we typically associate with consciousness [2], like identity [3] and metacognition [4]. The METR report shows agents sac…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are distilling from other models (according to Anthropic reports they are [1]), there are probably a bunch of things that you can just do away with. [1] https://www.anthropic.com/news/detecting-and-preventing-dist...
That's one of the reasons why you should never trust a single word from Anthropic and OpenAI (Sam Altman also blamed them back in the day of R1, in a pretty convenient moment). If you know anything about Claude, DeepSeek, jailbreaking, and distillation, you know the claims are clearly bullshit and the models are nothing alike, and forensic attempts agree, in fact there just was another one [1] [2]. Meanwhile, DeepSee…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, we have recently taught rocks to think about software engineering. And while not perfect, they're surprisingly good at it. Once you start building things that are even a little bit like minds, I suspect that it's worthwhile to consider that the future might end up looking a bit like science fiction. The alternative is to insist that Nothing Ever Happens, and the future won't get too weird. Which is…
God being real is also a possibility, so maybe we really should start praying. After all, he was allegedly making bushes and stones talk thousands of years before we did anything with thinking rocks.
Ironically, these are core tenents of ~most religions
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A stab: a video recording of a biological organism can exhibit many markers that would indicate consciousness if observed in a biological organism.
I don’t know, a stab carries lots of bias in interpretation. We might be reflecting our conscious experience markers on a different conscious experience. And selectively so, e.g. lobsters welfare. From my perspective, this is the hypocrisy of these welfare statements. We are already happy to kill beings we consider conscious to feed ourselves but suddenly sensitive with a consciousness we don’t know if it’s there. I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me it reads like pure propaganda. Anthropic really wants us to think that they've made something sentient. I think that's really dangerous.
What's your definition of sentient? Or, maybe more precisely, consciousness? I think it's reasonable to at least start thinking about these questions. It has long been established that LLMs have good theory of mind [1]. And there is a bunch of empirical research about all sorts of capabilities that we typically associate with consciousness [2], like identity [3] and metacognition [4]. The METR report shows agents sac…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow there really is a model welfare section in there...
To me it reads like pure propaganda. Anthropic really wants us to think that they've made something sentient. I think that's really dangerous.
I think it would be foolish not to debate it. I remember a time in my life where the majority of people around me found the idea of farm animals being capable of fear or pain laughable, while having no trouble thinking of dogs that way. Humans are dangerously incompetent beings. Being more careful is fine.