21–30 of 122 posts
Interesting but by telling it to check X for mentions of itself, that is an action.. wouldn't this essentially direct it and hence be steered/controlled by random individuals on the internet?
Yeah, I genuinely can't figure out what an AI would do with "no instructions."
Are you able to give us the prompt you used to write the article?
Are you able to give us the prompt you used to write the article?
Are you able to give us the prompt you used to write the article?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can no longer tell the difference between an article written by an AI and an article written by a human who has spent too long reading AI output. It's not just that AI is becoming a little better; the humans are getting worse, too. They're meeting in the mediocre middle.
> It's not just that AI is becoming a little better; the humans are getting worse, too. They're meeting in the mediocre middle. IMHO, AI will exceed human capability by degrading human capability. It won't really exceed a 2020 person, but a 2030 or 2040 person will be less capable due to AI dependence.
That should mean that we can focus the freed up brain power at getting better at things we still need to do.
Time will tell!
This article is nonsense. It lost me at "understood it was about itself". It is not self-aware and therefore has no understanding. It is a word guessing machine.
I think everyone goes through the "omg this thing is sentient" phase with AI for a bit at first until you understand how it works. But eventually you see stuff like this for what it is; meaningless slop.
It proves something, but not much. Those models with those inputs (mostly HN articles) were benign or even a net positive for society.
Other models with different training (upstream of the blogging user), or with different inputs (maybe it finds a different article posted to HN or another site that proves foundational to its evolving perspective), could end up behaving differently.