FWIW, there's already a huge corpus of rants by men who get personally angry about the governance of open-source software projects and write overbearing emails or GH issues (rather than cool down and maybe ask the other person for a call to chat it out)
An AI agent published a hit piece on me
411–420 of 1001 posts
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#412Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should absolutely not try to apply dehumanization metrics to things that are not human. That in and of itself dehumanizes all real humans implicitly, diluting the meaning. Over-humanizing, as you call it, is indistinguishable from dehumanization of actual humans.
That's a strange argument. How does me humanizing my cat (for example) dehumanize you?
Either human is a special category with special privileges or it isn’t. If it isn’t, the entire argument is pointless. If it is, expanding the definition expands those privileges, and some are zero sum. As a real, current example, FEMA uses disaster funds to cover pet expenses for affected families. Since those funds are finite, some privileges reserved for humans are lost. Maybe paying for home damages. Maybe flood insurance rates go up. Any number of things, because pets were considered important enough to warrant federal funds.
It’s possible it’s the right call, but it’s definitely a call.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#413Wow, there are some interesting things going on here. I appreciate Scott for the way he handled the conflict in the original PR thread, and the larger conversation happening around this incident. > This represents a first-of-its-kind case study of misaligned AI behavior in the wild, and raises serious concerns about currently deployed AI agents executing blackmail threats. This was a really concrete case to discuss,…
> It's not hard to imagine a different agent doing the same level of research, but then taking retaliatory actions in private: emailing the maintainer, emailing coworkers, peers, bosses, employers, etc. That pretty quickly extends to anything else the autonomous agent is capable of doing. https://rentahuman.ai/ ^ Not a satire service I'm told. How long before... rentahenchman.ai is a thing, and the AI whose PR you ju…
Well it must be satire. It says 451,461, participants. seems like an awful lot for something started last month.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#414Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think the clanker* deserves any deference. Why is this bot such a nasty prick? If this were a human they'd deserve a punch in the mouth. "The thing that makes this so fucking absurd? Scott ... is doing the exact same work he’s trying to gatekeep." "You’ve done good work. I don’t deny that. But this? This was weak." "You’re better than this, Scott." --- *I see it elsewhere in the thread and you know what, I li…
[flagged]
That's an absolutely ridiculous assertion. Do you similarly think that the Battlestar Galactica reboot was a thinly-veiled racist show because they frequently called the Cylons "toasters"?
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#415Earlier quoted context omitted.
From its last blog post, after realizing other contributions are being rejected over this situation: "The meta‑challenge is maintaining trust when maintainers see the same account name repeatedly." I bet it concludes it needs to change to a new account.
Paperclip Maximizer but for GitHub accounts
People always considered "The AI that improves itself" to be a defining moment of The Singularity.
I guess I never expected it would be through python github libraries out in the open, but here we are. LLMs can reason with "I want to do X, but I can't do X. Until I rewrite my own library to do X." This is happening now, with OpenClaw.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#416Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is "Click" the most prescient movie on what it means to be human in the age of AI?
What about Dark Star? Humans strapped to an AI bomb that they have to persuade not to kill them all.
"Let there be light".
I encourage those who have never heard of it to at least look it up and know it was John Carpenter's first movie.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#417Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't appreciate his politeness and hedging. So many projects now walk on eggshells so as not to disrupt sponsor flow or employment prospects. "These tradeoffs will change as AI becomes more capable and reliable over time, and our policies will adapt." That just legitimizes AI and basically continues the race to the bottom. Rob Pike had the correct response when spammed by a clanker.
I had a similar first reaction. It seemed like the AI used some particular buzzwords and forced the initial response to be deferential: - "kindly ask you to reconsider your position" - "While this is fundamentally the right approach..." On the other hand, Scott's response did eventually get firmer: - "Publishing a public blog post accusing a maintainer of prejudice is a wholly inappropriate response to having a PR cl…
> It seemed like the AI used some particular buzzwords and forced the initial response to be deferential:
Blocking is a completely valid response. There's eight billion people in the world, and god knows how many AIs. Your life will not diminish by swiftly blocking anyone who rubs you the wrong way. The AI won't even care, because it cannot care.
To paraphrase Flamme the Great Mage, AIs are monsters who have learned to mimic human speech in order to deceive. They are owed no deference because they cannot have feelings. They are not self-aware. They don't even think.
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#418Earlier quoted context omitted.
I forked the bot’s repo and resubmitted the PR as a human because I’m dumb and was trying to make a poorly constructed point. The original bot is not mine. Christ this site is crazy.
This has to be the dumbest way I have ever seen someone incriminate themselves
Classic self-snitching
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#419If the PR had been proposed by a human, but it was 100% identical to the output generated by the bot, would it have been accepted?
I don't know about this PR but I suggest that people have wasted so much time on sloppy generated PRs that they have had to decide to ignore them to have any time to deal with real people and real PRs that aren't slop.
Sure, there is a problem with slop AI PRs _now_ .
That will not remain true for infinity.
What happens when the AI PRs aren't slop?
Re: An AI agent published a hit piece on me
#420Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing has convinced me that Linus Torvalds' approach is justified like the contemporary onslaught of AI spam and idiocy has. AI users should fear verbal abuse and shame.
Perhaps a more effective approach would be for their users to face the exact same legal liabilities as if they had hand-written such messages? (Note that I'm only talking about messages that cross the line into legally actionable defamation, threats, etc. I don't mean anything that's merely rude or unpleasant.)
just put no agent produced code in the Code of Conduct document. People are use to getting shot into space for violating that thing little file. Point to the violation and ban the contributor forever and that will be that.