41–50 of 73 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is more like citogenesis in Wikipedia, imo: if a LLM is trusted, inaccuracies will seep into places that one doesn’t expect to have been LLM generated and then, possibly, reingested into a LLM.
That's already an issue without an LLM in the middle.
The people pushing this line of concern are also developing AICert to fix it. While I’m sure they’re right - factually tampering with an LLM is possible - I doubt that this will be a widespread issue. Using an LLM knowingly to generate false news seems like it will have similar reach to existing conspiracy theory sites. It doesn’t seem likely to me that simply having an LLM will make theorists more mainstream. And in…
I think it’s a bigger problem than fake news. Sure, LLMs can generate that, but what they can do much better than prior disinformation automation is have tailored, context-aware conversations. So a nefarious actor could deploy a fleet of AI bots to comment in various internet forums, to both argue down dissenting opinions, as well as build the impression of consensus for whatever point they are arguing. It’s complete…
I imagine there's a limit to how much blood you can squeeze out of the Clinton's (or any other sketchy geezer's) dirty laundry, even for a superintelligence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pretty easy. Probably no additional training is required! You probably would need to just get hold of a foundation model that has no AI safety type training done on it. Then ask it nicely. You could also feed it in context some examples of the fake news you would like. And maybe the style. "Here is a BBC article, write an article that Elon Musk plans to visit a black hole by 2030 in this style".
You could also just use a text editor to write a fake news story, or pay $5 to a freelancer to write it if you're busy. I don't understand why people belive llms fundamentally change anything. Worst case scenario they make you slightly more efficient at your malfeasance, just like they do with legit tasks.
I feel intuitively this makes sense. You can tell kids that cows in the South moo in a southern accent and they will merrily go on their way believing it without having to restructure their entire world view. It goes with the problem of “understanding” vs parroting. Human-centric example but you get the point.
Kids, but not adults. What's the difference? A more interconnected world model with underlying structure. LLMs have such structure as well, proportional to how well they're trained. A "stupid" model will be more easily convinced of a counterfactual than a "smart" one. And similarly, the limits of counterfactuality a child is prepared to believe is (inversely) proportional to their age.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Russian disinformation tactics but massively scaled up. And those were already wildly effective. Russian disinformation's success in the 2016 election is massively over hyped for the usual partisan sour grapes reasons. You cannot move the world with six figures of Facebook ads, if you could, everyone would spend a lot more money on Facebook ads.
People have voted with 130 billion dollars a year that Meta ads are an effective means of influence
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So a nefarious actor could deploy a fleet of AI bots to comment in various internet forums, to both argue down dissenting opinions, as well as build the impression of consensus for whatever point they are arguing. And the dissenting opinion will be able to do the same. Twelve year old kids will be running swarms of these for fun, and the technology will be so widely proliferated that everyone will encounter it dail…
I don’t disagree, but fools will still be fooled. And there are a lot of fools. I do wonder what it means for the future of the internet. I don’t think net good is coming out of this.
[flagged]
Once, anonymity is gone, your ads will outsmart you and pedophiles will just hop to another communication channel.
Both WEI and "think about the children" is a weapon too, if you will.
I think, the only right solution is education. But that cost money, which apparently is hard to solve.
[flagged]
The story of the Tower of Babel is a premonition of what Facebook and Twitter have attempted to build; the LLMs are the "heavens" the tower is attempting to reach.
[flagged]
>efforts on WEI and similar sandboxes. It may help with horrible issues around CSAM Once, anonymity is gone, your ads will outsmart you and pedophiles will just hop to another communication channel. Both WEI and "think about the children" is a weapon too, if you will. I think, the only right solution is education. But that cost money, which apparently is hard to solve.