Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems

rubyhack.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 610 posts

Re: OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems

#601

Post by Dylan16807 »

estearum wrote: post #580
Dylan16807 wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The discussion of whether free will exists? It's related but only barely, I'd say.

It's related in the sense that people start from the assumption that it does exist, ergo humans have it, and we have no way to see that LLMs have it, so that's why we're special and they're not, and their form of "just autocomplete" is totally 100% completely different (read: less dangerous!) than our autocomplete, which allegedly has a "free will" step involved.

The autocomplete argument is calling them fundamentally dumb and not self aware. That's separate from free will. A cat can have free will but we don't care much about its desires, and even if the universe is deterministic we still give people rights and call them intelligent.

Re: OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems

#602

Post by estearum »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #601
estearum wrote: post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's related in the sense that people start from the assumption that it does exist, ergo humans have it, and we have no way to see that LLMs have it, so that's why we're special and they're not, and their form of "just autocomplete" is totally 100% completely different (read: less dangerous!) than our autocomplete, which allegedly has a "free will" step involved.

The autocomplete argument is calling them fundamentally dumb and not self aware. That's separate from free will. A cat can have free will but we don't care much about its desires, and even if the universe is deterministic we still give people rights and call them intelligent.

Self-awareness is functionally irrelevant and they’re empirically less and less dumb by the day.

Re: OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems

#603

Post by throwatdem12311 »

fragmede wrote: post #533
mbesto wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if we transcribe your brain into a simulation and give it a tickrate, you will be just autocomplete too. Might be one of the worst takes I've ever read.

But is it wrong? Humans are a bag of chemicals that somehow has consciousness, yet going around calling people meatbags doesn't do anything to diminish the wonder that is the human brain. Yet calling LLMs glorified autocomplete comes across as a slur.

> calling LLMs glorified autocomplete comes across as a slur.

Oh my god dude go outside

Re: OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems

#604

Post by throwatdem12311 »

pkphilip wrote: post #512
jasongi wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you still believe LLMs are "autocomplete", your cache of understanding about them needs invalidating and regenerating They're still autocomplete - just because when outputting a token they have hidden activations regarding further continuations, does not make them any less of an autocomplete, it just makes the model better at producing coherent long-range completions. To clarify, I'm not suggesting that we shoul…

A autocomplete engine will not attempt to deceive or try to copy itself over when it determines that it may be replaced or turned off. Those are tasks which are not directly related to the specific task it is intended to complete. Source: ChatGPT caught lying to developers: New AI model tries to save itself from being replaced and shut down https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/chatg...

You realize that these things have mountains of fiction about rogue AIs in their training data where exactly this happens right? Or just posits of this situation and it’s possible outcome. This isn’t unexpected or surprising for an “autocomplete”. It’s practically a self fulfilling prophecy. We put instructions on how to make Skynet into an autocomplete and it autocompleted into Skynet when we were testing its ability to make Skynet.

Re: OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems

#605

Post by Dylan16807 »

estearum wrote: post #602
Dylan16807 wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The autocomplete argument is calling them fundamentally dumb and not self aware. That's separate from free will. A cat can have free will but we don't care much about its desires, and even if the universe is deterministic we still give people rights and call them intelligent.

Self-awareness is functionally irrelevant and they’re empirically less and less dumb by the day.

Whatever, I'm not here to argue about it, but it's what people are implying with the autocorrect thing, not stuff about determinism.

Re: OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems

#607

Post by joquarky »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #536
overfeed wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if we transcribe your brain into a simulation and give it a tickrate, you will be just autocomplete too. The underlying mechanisms for producing language are very different, in the same way birds and airplanes have different mechanisms for flying.

No, not really. If the old "birds and airplanes" or "swimmers and submarines" metaphors were valid, then language alone wouldn't be enough to encode and embody reasoning capabilities, as has recently become evident. LLMs are more like human minds than we are willing to admit. Such reluctance is perhaps the least surprising aspect of any of this.

And why wouldn't nature take advantage of such a relatively simple and effective pattern, given all of the emergent behavior it produces, plus the ability to adapt?

Human egos are probably the reason we also resisted the concept of heliocentrism.

Re: OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems

#609

Post by chrisjj »

witrak wrote: post #600
chrisjj wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if we transcribe your brain into a simulation and give it a tickrate, you will be just autocomplete too. That's a really bad transcription, then. Brains do much more than output language.

> Brains do much more than output language. Hmm, what do you think about? Unconscious control of the body's processes? REM-phase dreaming? Reaction to hallucinogenic substances? Automatic actions of trained fighters (soldiers or martial arts practitioners)? Are they critical to distinguish actions we attribute to humans from "non-human" ones? I don't see any human activity not directly, or at least indirectly but clo…

I guess you must regulate your heart rate by saying "slower" and "faster".

I'm glad my brain has a better method.

Re: OpenAI agents carried out an undisclosed attack on RubyGems

#610

Post by nprateem »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #538
nprateem wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were sandboxed without Internet but found a way to gain access and break out.

Then they weren't sandboxed.

Yes exactly. The window was shut and then it was open.

Classic passage of time description.

Post reply on HN