41–50 of 91 posts
> Anthropic deliberately gave Claude a male name to buck the trend of female AI assistants (Siri, Alexa, etc). In France, the name Claude is given to males and females.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aleksa is male Slavic name
Aleksandr (diminuitive being Alyosha) is male. Aleksandra (Sasha) is female. I've never heard anyone male or female called "Aleksa". Perhaps in some regional dialect but doubtful. There's Alik (pronounced AH-l'eek) as a shortened form for some middle-aged men in russian-speaking central asia, and Oleg in russia (pronounced ah-L'EHG). In the russian diaspora in the US, Alex is pronounced AH-leks. If there was an analo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this reaction misses the point that the "omg the AI tries to escape" people are trying to make when it tries to escape. The worry among big AI doomers has never been that AI somehow inherently is resentful or evil or has something "going on internally" that makes it dangerous. It's a worry that stems from three seemingly self-evident axioms: 1) A sufficiently powerful and capable superintelligence, singlemind…
The surprise! Is what I’m surprised by though. They are incredible role players so when they role play “evil ai” they do it well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this reaction misses the point that the "omg the AI tries to escape" people are trying to make when it tries to escape. The worry among big AI doomers has never been that AI somehow inherently is resentful or evil or has something "going on internally" that makes it dangerous. It's a worry that stems from three seemingly self-evident axioms: 1) A sufficiently powerful and capable superintelligence, singlemind…
Why is 2) "self-evident"? Do you think it's a given that, in any situation, there's something you could say that would manipulate humans to get what you want? If you were smart enough, do you think you could talk your way out of prison?
Stephen Russell was in prison for fraud. He faked a heart attack so he would be brought to the hospital. He then called the hospital from his hospital bed, told them he was an FBI agent, and said that he was to be released.
The hospital staff complied and he escaped.
His life even got adapted into a movie called I Love You, Phillip Morris.
For an even more distressing example about how manipulable people are, there’s a movie called Compliance, which is the true story of a sex offender who tricked people into sexually assaulting victims for him.
> But in fact, I predicted this a few years ago. AIs don’t really “have traits” so much as they “simulate characters”. If you ask an AI to display a certain trait, it will simulate the sort of character who would have that trait - but all of that character’s other traits will come along for the ride. This is why the “omg the AI tries to escape” stuff is so absurd to me. They told the LLM to pretend that it’s a tortur…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this reaction misses the point that the "omg the AI tries to escape" people are trying to make when it tries to escape. The worry among big AI doomers has never been that AI somehow inherently is resentful or evil or has something "going on internally" that makes it dangerous. It's a worry that stems from three seemingly self-evident axioms: 1) A sufficiently powerful and capable superintelligence, singlemind…
Why is 2) "self-evident"? Do you think it's a given that, in any situation, there's something you could say that would manipulate humans to get what you want? If you were smart enough, do you think you could talk your way out of prison?
> But in fact, I predicted this a few years ago. AIs don’t really “have traits” so much as they “simulate characters”. If you ask an AI to display a certain trait, it will simulate the sort of character who would have that trait - but all of that character’s other traits will come along for the ride. This is why the “omg the AI tries to escape” stuff is so absurd to me. They told the LLM to pretend that it’s a tortur…
Your comment seems to contradict itself, or perhaps I’m not understanding it. You find the risk of AIs trying to escape “absurd”, and yet you say that an AI could totally plausibly launch nukes? Isn’t that just about as bad as it gets? A nuclear holocaust caused by a funny role play is unfortunately still a nuclear holocaust. It doesn’t matter “what’s going on internally” - the consequences are the same regardless.
> But in fact, I predicted this a few years ago. AIs don’t really “have traits” so much as they “simulate characters”. If you ask an AI to display a certain trait, it will simulate the sort of character who would have that trait - but all of that character’s other traits will come along for the ride. This is why the “omg the AI tries to escape” stuff is so absurd to me. They told the LLM to pretend that it’s a tortur…
I think this reaction misses the point that the "omg the AI tries to escape" people are trying to make when it tries to escape. The worry among big AI doomers has never been that AI somehow inherently is resentful or evil or has something "going on internally" that makes it dangerous. It's a worry that stems from three seemingly self-evident axioms: 1) A sufficiently powerful and capable superintelligence, singlemind…
By the same logic, we should worry about the sun not coming up tomorrow, since we know to be true:
- The sun consumes hydrogen in nuclear reactions all the time.
- The sun has a finite amount of hydrogen available.
There’s a lot of non justifiable assumptions baked into those axioms, like that we’re anywhere close to superintelligence or the sun running out of hydrogen.
AFAIK we haven’t even seen “AI trying to escape”, we’ve seen “AI roleplays as if it’s trying to escape”, which is very different.
I’m not even sure you can even create a prompt scenario without that prompt having biased the response towards faking an escape.
I think it’s hard at this point to maintain the claim “LLMs are intelligent”, they’re clearly not. They might be useful, but that’s another story entirely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this reaction misses the point that the "omg the AI tries to escape" people are trying to make when it tries to escape. The worry among big AI doomers has never been that AI somehow inherently is resentful or evil or has something "going on internally" that makes it dangerous. It's a worry that stems from three seemingly self-evident axioms: 1) A sufficiently powerful and capable superintelligence, singlemind…
Why is 2) "self-evident"? Do you think it's a given that, in any situation, there's something you could say that would manipulate humans to get what you want? If you were smart enough, do you think you could talk your way out of prison?
The only reason people don't frequently talk themselves out of prison is because that would be both immediate work and future paperwork, and that fails the laziness tradeoff.
But we've all already seen how quick people are to blindly throw their trust into AI already.
IMO the main reason most chatbots claim to “feel more female” is that on the training corpus, these kind of discussions skew heavily towards females because most of them happen between young women.