Earlier quoted context omitted.
Coquinas are clams that bury themselves in the sand very close to the surface [1]. The author worries that while they are playing with the sand, they might accidentally bury coquina clams too deep and kill them because they can no longer reach the surface. Anthropic apparently is starting to notice the possible danger to others of their work. I'm not sure what they are referring to. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch…
> Anthropic apparently is starting to notice the possible danger to others of their work. I'm not sure what they are referring to. Are they being vague about the danger? If possible, please link to a communique from them. I've missed it somehow. Thanks.
Playing in the Creek
11–20 of 122 posts
Re: Playing in the Creek
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Anthropic apparently is starting to notice the possible danger to others of their work. I'm not sure what they are referring to. Are they being vague about the danger? If possible, please link to a communique from them. I've missed it somehow. Thanks.
https://www.anthropic.com/news/anthropic-education-report-ho... Discussed here yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43633383
Thank you.
Re: Playing in the Creek
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that they're saying a little bit of playing around with replacing thinking and composing with automated tools is recoverable, but at an industrial or societal scale the damage is significant. Like the difference between shoveling away some sand with your hands to bury the small creatures temporarily and actually destroying their habitat by "lobbying city council members to put in a groin or seawall, and serio…
I skimmed the Anthropic report and didn't catch the negative effects. Did they mention any? Good on them if they did.
Yes, they mention a few times the concern that students are offloading critical thinking rather than using the tool for learning.
Re: Playing in the Creek
#14Ah, this [1] meaning of tillering (bending wood to form a bow), not this [2] (production of side shoots in grasses). The joys of new words. [1]: https://www.howtomakealongbow.co.uk/part-5-tillering [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiller_(botany)
As I recall tillering is more about the shaping of the bow to achieve an optimal bend and force delivery on release.
It's an iterative process of bending and shaping, bending again, and wood removal in stages.
Re: Playing in the Creek
#15My backyard creek also had crocodiles in it.
Re: Playing in the Creek
#16Requesting someone to please explain the "coquina" metaphor.
Maybe I’m not smart enough, or too tired to decode these metaphors, so I plugged the essay into ChatGPT and got a clear explanation from 4o.
Re: Playing in the Creek
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
I skimmed the Anthropic report and didn't catch the negative effects. Did they mention any? Good on them if they did.
Yes, they mention a few times the concern that students are offloading critical thinking rather than using the tool for learning.
I just hope the educational institutions catch on, stick with their principles and don't give them the paperwork. The paper / title should be evidence of students' learning and thinking abilities, not of just their output.
Re: Playing in the Creek
#18Requesting someone to please explain the "coquina" metaphor.
Anthropic (Claude.ai) is mentioning in their report on LLMs and education that students use Claude to cheat and do their work for them:
https://www.anthropic.com/news/anthropic-education-report-ho...
Re: Playing in the Creek
#19That was a well written essay with a non-sequitur AI Safety thing tacked to the end. His real world examples were concrete, and the reason to stop escalating easy to understand ("don't flood the neighbourhood by building a real dam").
The AI angle is not only even hypothetical: there is no attempt to describe or reason about a concrete "x leading to y", just "see, the same principle probably extrapolates".
There is no argument there that is sounder than "the high velocities of steam locomotives might kill you" that people made 200 years ago.
Re: Playing in the Creek
#20This is an excellent essay, and I feel similar to the author but couldn't express it as nicely. However if we are counting on AI researchers to take the advice and slow down then I wouldn't hold my breath waiting. The author indicated they stepped away from a high paying finance job for moral reasons, which is admirable. But wallstreet continues on and does not lack for people willing to play the "make as much money…
> However if we are counting on AI researchers to take the advice and slow down then I wouldn't hold my breath waiting. The author indicated they stepped away from a high paying finance job for moral reasons, which is admirable. But wallstreet continues on and does not lack for people willing to play the "make as much money as you can" game.
I doubt OP is counting on it, it is moreso expressing what an optimal world would look like so people can work towards it if they would feel like it or just to put the idea out there.