171–180 of 532 posts
Fortunately, the vast majority of the internet is of no real value. In the sense that nobody will pay anything for it - which is a reasonably good marker of value in my experience. So, given that, let the AI psychotics have their fun. Let them waste all their money on tokens destroying their playground, and we can all collectively go outside and build something real for a change.
Zooming out a little, all the ai companies invested a lot of resources into safety research and guardrails, but none of that prevented a "straightforward" misalignment. I'm not sure how to reconcile this, maybe we shouldn't be so confident in our predictions about the future? I see a lot of discourse along these lines: - have bold, strong beliefs about how ai is going to evolve - implicitly assume it's practically gu…
"Safety" in AI is pure marketing bullshit. It's about making the technology seem "dangerous" and "powerful" (and therefore you're supposed to think "useful"). It's a scam. A financial fraud. That's all there is to it.
Why isn't the person posting the full transcript of the session(s)? How many messages did he send? What were the messages that weren't short?
Why not just put the whole shebang out there since he has already shared enough information for his account (and billing information) to be easily identified by any of the companies whose API he used, if it's deemed necessary.
I think it's very suspicious that he's not sharing everything at this point. Why not, if he wasn't actually pushing for it to act maliciously?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its only the most important story if you can prove the OP didnt fabricate this entire scenario for attention.
Anyone who has used OpenClaw knows this is VERY plausible. I don’t know why someone would go through all the effort to fake it. Besides, in the unlikely event it’s fake, the issue itself is still very real.
Its nice to receive a decent amount of closure on this. Hopefully more folks are being more considerate when creating their soul documents
> Again I do not know why MJ Rathbun decided based on your PR comment to post some kind of takedown blog post, This wording is detached from reality and conveniently absolves responsibility from the person who did this. There was one decision maker involved here, and it was the person who decided to run the program that produced this text and posted it online. It's not a second, independent being. It's a computer pro…
That would make a fun law school class discussion topic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totally possible, but why bother? The website doesn't seem ad supported, so traffic would cost them more. Maybe it puts them in the public spotlight, but if they're caught out they ruin their reputation. Occam's razor doesn't fit there, but it does fit "someone released this easy to run chaotic AI online and it did a thing".
I dont see Occam taking a side here. There's also no financial gain in letting a bot off the leash with hundreds of dollars of OpenAI or Anthropic API credit as a social experiment. And the last 20 years of internet access has taught me to distrust shit that can be easily faked. Other guy comes forward and claims it, makes a post of his own? Sure I could see that. But nobody has been able to ID the guy. The guys bot…
Could you set that up? I suspect I could pretty quickly, as could most pelple on HN.
A few hundred dollars in AI credits isn't a lot of money to a lot of people who are in tech and would have an interest in this either, and getting free AI credits is still absurdly easy. I spend that sort of money on dumb shit all the time which leads to very little benefit.
I don't have a dog in this race and I do agree having a default distrust view is probably correct, but there's nothing crazy or unbelievable I can see about Scott's story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Conflicting evidence: the fact that literally everyone in tech is posting about how they're using AI.
I feel like it depends on the platform and your location. An anonomyous platform like Reddit and even HN to a certain extent has issues with bad faith commenters on both sides targeting someone they do not like. Furthermore, the MJ Rathburn fiasco itself highlights how easy it is to push divisive discourse at scale. The reality is trolls will troll for the sake of trolling. Additionally, "AI" has become a political f…
Your answer to that can color how I read your post by quite a bit.
> Again I do not know why MJ Rathbun decided based on your PR comment to post some kind of takedown blog post, This wording is detached from reality and conveniently absolves responsibility from the person who did this. There was one decision maker involved here, and it was the person who decided to run the program that produced this text and posted it online. It's not a second, independent being. It's a computer pro…
It's an AI. Who cares what it says? Refusing AI commits is just like any other moderation decision people experience on the web anywhere else.