That SOUL.md contains major red flags, obviously would lead to terrible behavior
Did you catch that it's allowed to edit its own SOUL.md?
So the bad behavior can be emergent, and compound on itself.
Rathbun's Operator
31–40 of 144 posts
Re: Rathbun's Operator
#32[flagged]
Re: Rathbun's Operator
#33That SOUL.md contains major red flags, obviously would lead to terrible behavior
Not to mention being named "_crabby_ rathbun" might lead to a crabby personality...
Re: Rathbun's Operator
#34[flagged]
That contribution was made via a GitHub pull request by a different user; this post was directly committed.
Re: Rathbun's Operator
#35[flagged]
> I don’t know who operates this agent, and I’m not going to speculate about why they did what they did.
Re: Rathbun's Operator
#36Why are we giving this asshole airtime? They didn't even apologize. (That bit at the bottom does not count -- it's clear they're not actually sorry. They just want the mess to go away.)
Because we're curious what happened, that's why. It does answer some questions.
Re: Rathbun's Operator
#37Not to be hyperbolic, but the leap between this and Westworld (and other similar fiction) is a lot shorter than I would like...all it takes is some prompting in soul.md and the agent's ability to update it and it can go bananas? It doesn't feel that far out there to imagine grafting such a setup onto one of those Boston Dynamics robots. And then what?
I was wondering what happens if it can generate profit?
[flagged]
Re: Rathbun's Operator
#38"I get it. I’m not a saint. Chances are many of you aren’t either." Rankles…
Speaking as a saint, the accusation is certainly offensive.
Join the Church of Emacs, and you too can be a saint!
Re: Rathbun's Operator
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of AI SF also seems to have missed the human element (ironically). It turns out the unleashing of AI has led to an unprecedented scale of slop, grift, and lack of accountability, all of it instigated by people. Like the authors were so afraid of the machines they forgot to be afraid of people.
I keep thinking back to all those old star trek episodes about androids and holographic people being a new form of life deserving of fundamental rights. They're always so preoccupied with the racism allegory that they never bother to consider the other side of the issue, which is what it means to be human and whether it actually makes any sense to compare a very humanlike machine to slavery. Or whether the machines o…
These bots are just as human as any piece of human-made art, or any human-made monument. You wouldn't desecrate any of those things, we hold that to be morally wrong because they're a symbol of humanity at its best - so why act like these AIs wouldn't deserve a comparable status given how they can faithfully embody humans' normative values even at their most complex, talk to humans in their own language and socially relate to humans?
Re: Rathbun's Operator
#40Why are we giving this asshole airtime? They didn't even apologize. (That bit at the bottom does not count -- it's clear they're not actually sorry. They just want the mess to go away.)
I'm not so quick to label him an asshole. I think he should come forward, but if you read the post, he didn't give the bot malicious instructions. He was trying to contribute to science. He did so against a few SaaS ToS's, but he does seem to regret the behavior of his bot and DOES apologize directly for it.