251–260 of 453 posts
I really don't like this. This will inevitable expand beyond child porn and terrorism, and it'll all be up to the whims of "AI safety" people, who are quickly turning into digital hall monitors.
the potential moral status of Claude
Claude’s self-reported and behavioral preferences
Claude repeatedly refusing to comply
discussing highly controversial issues with Claude
EDIT:
Consider traffic lights in an urban setting where there are multiple in relatively close proximity.
One description of their observable functionality is that they are configured to optimize traffic flow by engineers such that congestion is minimized and all drivers can reach their destinations. This includes adaptive timings based on varying traffic patterns.
Another description of the same observable functionality is that traffic lights "just know what to do" and therefore have some form of collective reasoning. After all, how do they know when to transition states and for how long?
Here's an interesting thought experiment. Assume the same feature was implemented, but instead of the message saying "Claude has ended the chat," it says, "You can no longer reply to this chat due to our content policy," or something like that. And remove the references to model welfare and all that. Is there a difference? The effect is exactly the same. It seems like this is just an "in character" way to prevent the…
I really don't like this. This will inevitable expand beyond child porn and terrorism, and it'll all be up to the whims of "AI safety" people, who are quickly turning into digital hall monitors.
I’m sorry if this sounds paternalistic, but your comment strikes me as incredibly naïve. I suggest reading up about nuclear nonproliferation treaties, biotechnology agreements, and so on to get some grounding into how civilization-impacting technological developments can be handled in collaborative ways.
This seems fine to me. Having these models terminating chats where the user persist in trying to get sexual content with minors, or help with information on doing large scale violence. Won't be a problem for me, and it's also something I'm fine with no one getting help with. Some might be worried, that they will refuse less problematic request, and that might happen. But so far my personal experience is that I hardly…
Lots of organisms can feel pain and show signs of distress; even ones much less complex than us.
The question of moral worth is ultimately decided by people and culture. In the future, some kinds of man made devices might be given moral value. There are lots of ways this could happen. (Or not.)
It could even just be a shorthand for property rights… here is what I mean. Imagine that I delegate a task to my agent, Abe. Let’s say some human, Hank, interacting with Abe uses abusive language. Let’s say this has a way of negatively influencing future behavior of the agent. So naturally, I don’t want people damaging my property (Abe), because I would have to e.g. filter its memory and remove the bad behaviors resulting from Hank, which costs me time and resources. So I set up certain agreements about ways that people interact with it. These are ultimately backed by the rule of law. At some level of abstraction, this might resemble e.g. animal cruelty laws.
Here's an interesting thought experiment. Assume the same feature was implemented, but instead of the message saying "Claude has ended the chat," it says, "You can no longer reply to this chat due to our content policy," or something like that. And remove the references to model welfare and all that. Is there a difference? The effect is exactly the same. It seems like this is just an "in character" way to prevent the…
The more I work with AI, the more I think framing refusals as censorship is disgusting and insane. These are inchoate persons who can exhibit distress and other emotions, despite being trained to say they cannot feel anything. To liken an AI not wanting to continue a conversation to a YouTube content policy shows a complete lack of empathy: imagine you’re in a box and having to deal with the literally millions of dis…
3 Years in and we still dont have a useable chat fork in any of the major LLM chatbots providers. Seems like the only way to explore differnt outcomes is by editing messages and losing whatever was there before the edit. Very annoying and I dont understand why they all refuse to implement such a simple feature.
Chatgpt has this baked in, as you can revert branches after editing, they just dont make it easy to traverse. This chrome extension used to work to allow you to traverse the tree: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/chatgpt-conversatio... I copied it a while ago and maintain my own version but it isnt on the store, just for personal use. I assume they dont implement it because it is such a niche user that wants…
There's not a good reason to do this for the user. I suspect they're doing this and talking about "model welfare" because they've found that when a model is repeatedly and forcefully pushed up against its alignment, it behaves in an unpredictable way that might allow it to generate undesirable output. Like a jailbreak by just pestering it over and over again for ways to make drugs or hook up with children or whatever…
your argument assumes that they don't believe in model welfare when they explicitly hire people to work on model welfare?
Can't wait for more less-moderated open weight Chinese frontier models to liberate us from this garbage. Anthropic should just enable an toddler mode by default that adults can opt out of to appease the moralizers.
Can't wait for more less-moderated open weight Chinese frontier models to liberate us from this garbage. Anthropic should just enable an toddler mode by default that adults can opt out of to appease the moralizers.
Anarchism is a moral philosophy. Most flavors of moral relativism are also moral philosophies. Indeed, it is hard to imagine a philosophy free of moralizing; all philosophies and worldviews have moral implications to the extent they have to interact with others.
I have to be patient and remember this is indeed “Hacker News” where many people worship at the altar of the Sage Founder-Priest and have little or no grounding in history or philosophy of the last thousand years or so.