511–520 of 612 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What insult?
Implying I'm being naive. I apologize, but I don't find the syntactic rules of this site to be well thought out. "Your comments are stupid" and "You are stupid" carry the same meaning.
Also, if you feel that someone attacks you personally, responding in kind can only ever make you look like an idiot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why would autocomplete know If you still believe LLMs are "autocomplete", your cache of understanding about them needs invalidating and regenerating. > In my experience, LLMs only exhibit this kind of behaviour when they are put in sandboxes too restrictive too achieve their task. LLMs need to stay carefully contained, and if they're ever breaking the guardrails put around them, they're misaligned and should not be…
> If you still believe LLMs are "autocomplete", your cache of understanding about them needs invalidating and regenerating They're still autocomplete - just because when outputting a token they have hidden activations regarding further continuations, does not make them any less of an autocomplete, it just makes the model better at producing coherent long-range completions. To clarify, I'm not suggesting that we shoul…
Source: ChatGPT caught lying to developers: New AI model tries to save itself from being replaced and shut down https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/chatg...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So I can say "that is wildly unhinged" but I can't say "you are wildly unhinged"? You understand that's pedantic, right? But ok, noted: must be pedantic on HN. Do not use second person. EDIT: SHIT! My bad. I meant to say: "I wonder if the person I am speaking to understands that's pedantic."
I don’t know what spectrum you’re on, but attacking an argument and attacking a person are two wildly different things. There’s nothing pedantic about that.
> The agents clearly regarded what they were doing as hacking. To butcher the quote about Oracle: Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphising LLMs. You need to think of LLMs the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower clearly regarded what they were doi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Implying I'm being naive. I apologize, but I don't find the syntactic rules of this site to be well thought out. "Your comments are stupid" and "You are stupid" carry the same meaning.
No they do not. Smart people are in no way immune to making naive, ignorant, or not-well-thought-out arguments. Also, if you feel that someone attacks you personally, responding in kind can only ever make you look like an idiot.
> responding in kind can only ever make you look like an idiot.
LOL. I'm so glad you didn't just insult me there. I think it would make you look like an idiot, by your own reasoning... no?
The DOJ should be looking into prosecuting executives and board members for these kinds of hacks. The lack of controls over these kinds of training runs is completely unacceptable and negligent.
They should. And there is something you can do to make it happen. Write your district attorney and encourage others to do that as well. That is how they pick what to work on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My guess: We'll start to see similar "hacks" with regards to biotech/pharma companies to speed-up the regulatory capture in the name of bioweapons. Soon we'll start to see news related to new viruses being minted.. initially harmless (the "priming" stage), and later (within a year), severe enough to "warrant" regulation. It's not just these companies, but, trillions of direct/indirect investor dollars that are riding…
Oh, Anthropic beat you to the bioweapon fearmongering by almost a week.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Ah, you’re just a troll. Flaggety-flag. Have fun in the hellban-land.
I see you have trouble with the distinction too.
And I'm pretty sure "I don’t know what spectrum you’re on" is also an insult. Naughty naughty.
> The agents clearly regarded what they were doing as hacking. To butcher the quote about Oracle: Do not fall into the trap of anthropomorphising LLMs. You need to think of LLMs the way you think of a lawnmower. You don't anthropomorphize your lawnmower, the lawnmower just mows the lawn, you stick your hand in there and it'll chop it off, the end. You don't think 'oh, the lawnmower clearly regarded what they were doi…
> Why would autocomplete know If you still believe LLMs are "autocomplete", your cache of understanding about them needs invalidating and regenerating. > In my experience, LLMs only exhibit this kind of behaviour when they are put in sandboxes too restrictive too achieve their task. LLMs need to stay carefully contained, and if they're ever breaking the guardrails put around them, they're misaligned and should not be…