Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you trust your LLM to file your taxes for you?
Yes because without an LLM I don't do it.
How did you do your taxes a couple years ago?
Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government
41–50 of 99 posts
Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government
#42There's no doubt that LLMs massively expand the ability of agencies like the NSA to perform large-scale surveillance at a higher quality. I wonder if Anthropic (or other LLM providers) ever push back or restrict these kinds of use cases? Or is that too risky for them?
NSA should be training their own GPT-4 or better model as we speak and should have been doing it for a long while now. Anything else is borderline incompetence.
And given the volume of data they likely sift through, I'd also expect them to want very small, high-throughput models for identifying targets for larger models to examine.
On the flip side, LLMs must give the NSA a new challenge: a flood of garbage text generated by no-one in particular. Perhaps there will be more effort to put surveillance directly on-device as tapping networks yields more noise.
Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government
#43Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
Boy, I can’t wait for the foundation of my house to disappear because the LLM mis-classified a drilling report as non-hazardous. What’s the deal here with liability and accountability? That’s a serious problem when considering using these for anything other than toy problems.
You don't actually think the LLM is reviewing those 30k documents do you? You tell it to write a program (which is easy to audit) to pull the info from the PDFs or whatever. I don't get why this crowd is so goddamn unimaginative with LLMs.
> You tell it to write a program (which is easy to audit) to pull the info from the PDFs
Wherein you discover that unless you ask it to consider the fact that PDFs are ... very hard to parse [1] [2] you get something that misses whole blocks of text or turns them into something they aren't and the rest of the program misses chunks of the document.
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22473263 [2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20200303102734/https://www.filin...
Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government
#45Going forward be very very wary of inputting sensitive information in Anthropic, OpenAI products, especially if you work for a foreign government, corporation. Listen to Edward Snowden. This guy is not fucking around.
you think they can’t already get all of that from the average Joe by accessing backdoors in the cell carriers, cloud providers, etc?
very optimistic of you :-)
Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government
#46I can imagine that for many government tasks, there would be a need for a reduced-censorship version of the AI model. It's pretty easy running into the guardrails on ChatGPT and friends when you talk about violence or other spicy topics. This then begs the question of what level of censorship reduction to apply. Should government employees be allowed to e.g., war-game a mass murder with an AI? What about discussing h…
Sure. Everyone, including government employees, should be allowed to discuss anything with AI. The problem is actually doing illegal things, which is... already illegal.
Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you see the kinds of things that are developed in the name of "defense" it's easy to see how AI "safety" could become a similar sort of doublespeak.
AI safety already is double speak. The primary meaning is "safety" for investors who don't want to be associated with something distasteful. The other meaning is basically a thin cover.
Well you can look forward to worse, give it another decade and Lockheed Martin will be extolling their commitment to AI safety while announcing their new generation of fully autonomous kill drones. For defense, of course.
Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm still dealing with hallucinations nearly every time I use it.
I get maybe one hallucination per twenty chats with gpt4.
I haven't tried more than a handful of queries, but I think I've gotten 100% rate of hallucination or generic useless response to specific question.
Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government
#49There's no doubt that LLMs massively expand the ability of agencies like the NSA to perform large-scale surveillance at a higher quality. I wonder if Anthropic (or other LLM providers) ever push back or restrict these kinds of use cases? Or is that too risky for them?
dumb question. I can understand LLM can be used for disinformation as it can generate text/image at scale. can you explain how it can do large scale surveillance?
Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
A genuine question and not meant as a snipe: as hallucinations are an inherent “feature” of LLMs, how can you be sure of the accuracy of the model’s interpretation of those 30,000 drilling report hazards? Or what is the acceptable level of risk?
You have it write a program to analyze it. I think a lot of people fail to understand that you don't always need the LLM to do the thing, have it write a program to do the thing for you.
That's not very likely to succeed, is it? LLMs can do a lot of things, but writing software that not only parses semi-proprietary file formats but also analyze unstructured data sounds more than little bit far fetched. I'd be impressed if just the first, and by far the easiest, part of that can be accomplished.