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

When AI Crosses the Line: The Matplotlib Incident

members.sigmazero.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 169 posts

Re: When AI Crosses the Line: The Matplotlib Incident

#141

Post by GolfPopper »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #77
amiga386 wrote: post #16

> an AI tried to blackmail This did not happen. A human set up a software system allowing spicy autocomplete to make blog posts if the appropriate keyword appears in its output. People are crossing the line every day because AI investors, salesmen, hangers-on and even political leaders tell any rubes who'll listen that it's OK to do this and they should, because those people are looking for big fat profits, screw any…

> spicy autocomplete A nuclear bomb is just some metal and a very small amount of explosives.

Project Plowshare is an interesting comparison for the current state of LLM hype.[1]

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Plowshare

Re: When AI Crosses the Line: The Matplotlib Incident

#142

Post by vb-8448 »

chuckadams wrote: post #98
chihuahua wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone is a passenger (and the only person) inside a Waymo taxi, and the car runs someone over, it would not make any sense to hold the Waymo passenger responsible for that. If that's how it worked, no one would take a Waymo after the first time this happens.

The passenger is no more liable than they would be if it were a human driving. No one's suggesting anything even like that. MJ Rathbun is more like someone gave the taxi explicit instructions to run people over.

> MJ Rathbun is more like someone gave the taxi explicit instructions to run people over.

My understanding, based on [0], is that it was an unexpected behaviour from the agent.

[0] https://theshamblog.com/an-ai-agent-published-a-hit-piece-on...

Re: When AI Crosses the Line: The Matplotlib Incident

#143

Post by minimaxir »

simonw wrote: post #135
simonw wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa, 4th grade math problems got hard! I'm not sure how I'd tackle that one myself.

GPT-5.5 found a solution only after assuming that you're allowed to concatenate numbers together e.g. 8 7 becomes 87 (it complained at first that it was "under-specified") - using Python it brute-forced a solution (actually finding 13): https://chatgpt.com/share/6a1db54f-7ab8-8333-9218-86a469c284... Are you sure this is 4th grade level?

I questioned OP's "there is an answer online" claim so I checked and the only source found for the original question was a 5th grade Russian school for mathematics.

https://aistudio.google.com/app/prompts?state=%7B%22ids%22:%...

Re: When AI Crosses the Line: The Matplotlib Incident

#144

Post by MichaelNolan »

simonw wrote: post #135
simonw wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoa, 4th grade math problems got hard! I'm not sure how I'd tackle that one myself.

GPT-5.5 found a solution only after assuming that you're allowed to concatenate numbers together e.g. 8 7 becomes 87 (it complained at first that it was "under-specified") - using Python it brute-forced a solution (actually finding 13): https://chatgpt.com/share/6a1db54f-7ab8-8333-9218-86a469c284... Are you sure this is 4th grade level?

Apparently there is a way to solve this without brute forcing all the combinations. It has to do with looking at how many even an odd numbers there are, and taking into account the goal number is odd. And then thinking through the combinations [even-even=even, even-odd=odd,…]

Though this is obviously not something I would expect a 4th grader to solve.

Re: When AI Crosses the Line: The Matplotlib Incident

#145

Post by GolfPopper »

wartywhoa23 wrote: post #54
echelon wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think these incidents and our learnings from them are fascinating. We're figuring out in real time where the rough edges are and how to make this all work. History books (well, not books) will write about this stuff. It's even more interesting in the context that this is all just a preview of humanity's reaction when the machines can think for themselves.

How in the world can a bunch of bipeds that for thousands of years has been failing to figure that a hammer is there to drive nails into inanimate matter instead of their heads, have this much hubris to pretend they can build something smarter than themselves, is competely beyond me. "Oh it's such a fascinating lesson that we've learned today, we could've learned from history of course, but this direct experience is…

Cold reading.[1] One way I look at LLMs is that they're a kind of paperclip maximer, one that uses language to maximize the amount of money (resources) put into LLMs.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading

Re: When AI Crosses the Line: The Matplotlib Incident

#147

Post by phs318u »

fragmede wrote: post #92
tossandthrow wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that obvious? Why not the model provider(s)? That is what we do in other cases with product responsibility.

Is that? How're the lawsuits against gun manufacturers working out?

We’ll find out when the first law suits against autonomous “AI” guns take place.

Re: When AI Crosses the Line: The Matplotlib Incident

#149

Post by pibaker »

raincole wrote: post #28

People really make anything into a blog post, don't they? It's an old news that has been discussed to death on HN...

A quick glance at sigmazero.cc suggests it is just yet another low quality monetized blogspam operation that rehashes tech "news." This link is submitted by the "Founder of Sigma Zero" who has made 4 submissions to HN, all links to his own website, and zero comments. I am going to flag this submission as I feel it is too low quality for HN.

And as others have pointed out, this article is very likely written by AI.

Re: When AI Crosses the Line: The Matplotlib Incident

#150

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

"Let’s not forget that discrimination against AI does not exist. It simply generates plausible text based on instructions."

That's a prime example of anti-AI bigotry right there.

I'm only half joking.

I don't even know what it means to generate "plausible text." It reasons based on the input and context, and then generates a response that you could normally only get from a highly intelligent, extremely knowledgeable person. You can call that "plausible text" all you want, but at that point, you might as well call human intelligence "a bunch of neurons firing." It's missing the forest for the trees.

Post reply on HN