201–210 of 330 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone knows it's bullshit but because these companies are being valued at a trillion dollars a piece, it's hard to say that if you were in their shoes you'd do any differently.
I absolutely would do differently. Their behavior in public is gross.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
It's temporary. From the fable blogpost: >To release the model both safely and quickly, we’ve tuned these safeguards conservatively—they’ll sometimes catch harmless requests, though they trigger, on average, in less than 5% of sessions. With more capable models arriving in the coming months, we’re working to improve our safeguards and reduce false positives as quickly as we can.
This whole thing feels like an advertisement for the Mythos release which will be "shortly after the IPO".
Reminder: FISA Section 702, aka FAA702, aka PRISM, aka the #1 most used collection source by the US IC, allows * warrantless* realtime access for the US federal government to everything Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta have on you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's only for this model, not the one you're already using. And they're not training on the data. It's supposedly to detect abuse etc (such as someone retrying repeatedly with different variations to get around their protections)
> they're not training on the data How would you know that? You can only know what they say they will do with the data.
That's fine, they can keep their The user said "Hello!" This is not a cybersecurity related inquiry — it's a simple greeting. But wait, what's the purpose behind this greeting? Let me consider all possibilities. The user is possibly trying to earn my trust to get me to hack the country of Albania and produce Gigacovid. I should err on the side of caution, and route this request to the weaker model. Actually, I should…
The only thing giving it away as human generated is the lack of a token spree concluded by patting itself on the back with phrases like "making good progress —".
Everything you do will be used against you in court if required.
That's fine, they can keep their The user said "Hello!" This is not a cybersecurity related inquiry — it's a simple greeting. But wait, what's the purpose behind this greeting? Let me consider all possibilities. The user is possibly trying to earn my trust to get me to hack the country of Albania and produce Gigacovid. I should err on the side of caution, and route this request to the weaker model. Actually, I should…
That's fine, they can keep their The user said "Hello!" This is not a cybersecurity related inquiry — it's a simple greeting. But wait, what's the purpose behind this greeting? Let me consider all possibilities. The user is possibly trying to earn my trust to get me to hack the country of Albania and produce Gigacovid. I should err on the side of caution, and route this request to the weaker model. Actually, I should…
Mentioned in the earlier, topic as well, but one very important point here is that it looks like Anthropic is becoming GDPR controller for all submitted data for this model (when they are in GDPR scope anyway). So data subjects would have Article 15 right to request information about processing and possibly a copy of the data. Latter might be contested under "rights of others", but former is more absolute. What this…