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

How AI knows things no one told it

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 140 posts

Re: How AI knows things no one told it

#71

Post by famouswaffles »

hammyhavoc wrote: post #49
famouswaffles wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real word actions and consequences give the words meaning. If you're rude to Bing, the conversation will end. You can keep typing but it won't respond. Searching the web and ending conversations are the only two actions Bing can currently do so what i'm saying is less applicable for now. But humanity is gearing up to give more and more control of more and more tools to increasingly powerful LLMs. Hell Bing is schedul…

So? This is a guardrail added by a Microsoft employee, mate. After their earlier dabblings in AI outputting bigotry and general toxicity, someone in their wisdom saw the sense to try and prevent going down a negative conversation path, hence all the edge lords on Reddit offering prompts to "jailbreak" an LLM and bypass the guardrails, which then get patched by a human being not long after. You're projecting so much m…

It's a guardrail that Bing controls, which is the whole point.

It doesn't matter what i believe or not. or what you believe or not. What matters are actions and consequences. "It's not really offended" doesn't change the outcome or make it less material(in this case - the end of the conversation). You're focusing on things that don't matter in the slightest.

It doesn't need to be "really offended", whatever that means to you. It just needs to be able to model being offended well enough to take actions that resemble an offended person. If you don't understand that then i don't know what else to tell you.

Re: How AI knows things no one told it

#72

Post by hammyhavoc »

famouswaffles wrote: post #71
hammyhavoc wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? This is a guardrail added by a Microsoft employee, mate. After their earlier dabblings in AI outputting bigotry and general toxicity, someone in their wisdom saw the sense to try and prevent going down a negative conversation path, hence all the edge lords on Reddit offering prompts to "jailbreak" an LLM and bypass the guardrails, which then get patched by a human being not long after. You're projecting so much m…

It's a guardrail that Bing controls, which is the whole point. It doesn't matter what i believe or not. or what you believe or not. What matters are actions and consequences. "It's not really offended" doesn't change the outcome or make it less material(in this case - the end of the conversation). You're focusing on things that don't matter in the slightest. It doesn't need to be "really offended", whatever that mean…

It's a guardrail that Microsoft controls, which the LLM is bound by.

If a car has a hood and headlights reminiscent of a face and tells you to "buckle up, buttercup" when you don't do your belt, does that mean it's genuinely caring for you?

Re: How AI knows things no one told it

#73

Post by famouswaffles »

hammyhavoc wrote: post #72
famouswaffles wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a guardrail that Bing controls, which is the whole point. It doesn't matter what i believe or not. or what you believe or not. What matters are actions and consequences. "It's not really offended" doesn't change the outcome or make it less material(in this case - the end of the conversation). You're focusing on things that don't matter in the slightest. It doesn't need to be "really offended", whatever that mean…

It's a guardrail that Microsoft controls, which the LLM is bound by. If a car has a hood and headlights reminiscent of a face and tells you to "buckle up, buttercup" when you don't do your belt, does that mean it's genuinely caring for you?

Microsoft arranged the guardrail. Bing decides when it should be implemented, much like an employee.

>If a car has a hood and headlights reminiscent of a face and tells you to "buckle up, buttercup" when you don't do your belt, does that mean it's genuinely caring for you?

Why do you keep going on pointless tangents?. Whether you think it genuinely cares or not is irrelevant. This isn't a hard concept to understand.

Re: How AI knows things no one told it

#74

Post by hammyhavoc »

famouswaffles wrote: post #73
hammyhavoc wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a guardrail that Microsoft controls, which the LLM is bound by. If a car has a hood and headlights reminiscent of a face and tells you to "buckle up, buttercup" when you don't do your belt, does that mean it's genuinely caring for you?

Microsoft arranged the guardrail. Bing decides when it should be implemented, much like an employee. >If a car has a hood and headlights reminiscent of a face and tells you to "buckle up, buttercup" when you don't do your belt, does that mean it's genuinely caring for you? Why do you keep going on pointless tangents?. Whether you think it genuinely cares or not is irrelevant. This isn't a hard concept to understand.

Source? Because every source I'm finding tells me pretty much words to this extent, which doesn't support what you're saying whatsoever with the LLM choosing to do anything:

"RAIL (Reliable AI Markup Language) is a language-agnostic, human-readable format for specifying structure, type information, validators, and corrective actions for LLM outputs. RAIL, an XML flavor, allows users to define the expected structure and types of LLM outputs, the quality criteria for valid output, and the corrective actions to take if the output is invalid."

Why do you keep projecting your own humanity onto the LLM?

Re: How AI knows things no one told it

#75

Post by famouswaffles »

hammyhavoc wrote: post #74
famouswaffles wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft arranged the guardrail. Bing decides when it should be implemented, much like an employee. >If a car has a hood and headlights reminiscent of a face and tells you to "buckle up, buttercup" when you don't do your belt, does that mean it's genuinely caring for you? Why do you keep going on pointless tangents?. Whether you think it genuinely cares or not is irrelevant. This isn't a hard concept to understand.

Source? Because every source I'm finding tells me pretty much words to this extent, which doesn't support what you're saying whatsoever with the LLM choosing to do anything: "RAIL (Reliable AI Markup Language) is a language-agnostic, human-readable format for specifying structure, type information, validators, and corrective actions for LLM outputs. RAIL, an XML flavor, allows users to define the expected structure a…

Source for what ? Do you have any idea of what you're talking about ? Hold on, How do you think Language models work ? What do you think the plain English Instructions are for ?

Re: How AI knows things no one told it

#76

Post by tornato7 »

snickell wrote: post #58
tomohelix wrote: post #43

Let for the sake of argument, assume that the LLM is truly sapience. Then this would be the first alien intelligence we have ever encountered. All life and intelligence we have seen before were organic, carbon-based life, including the most distant and unintuitive ones like the cephalopods, cetaceans, and primates. Even now we are still arguing whether these creatures are intelligent or they are just "not there" yet.…

I would hazard a guess that if we first encountered a ChatGPT-4 level LLM* as radio signals from Mars we would baseline assume it was "intelligent alien life". * assuming its instruction tuned: - in terms of self-disclosure (no "I'm made by openAI on earth" statements!) - sans its relatively schematic "guard rail" responses. It would be hard to imagine intelligent life being more obviously intelligent to us: ChatGPT…

You're absolutely right! Here's a prompt you can use to chat with a Martian. It's actually very entertaining!

> You are a representative of an alien civilization from Mars. I am a human who has made first contact with you. Write an opening message to earth. Stay in character as a martian. Make up facts and information where required. You know very little about Earth and are curious about our world and our civilization.

Re: How AI knows things no one told it

#77

Post by hammyhavoc »

famouswaffles wrote: post #75
hammyhavoc wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source? Because every source I'm finding tells me pretty much words to this extent, which doesn't support what you're saying whatsoever with the LLM choosing to do anything: "RAIL (Reliable AI Markup Language) is a language-agnostic, human-readable format for specifying structure, type information, validators, and corrective actions for LLM outputs. RAIL, an XML flavor, allows users to define the expected structure a…

Source for what ? Do you have any idea of what you're talking about ? Hold on, How do you think Language models work ? What do you think the plain English Instructions are for ?

A source for how guardrails function as what you state isn't what's documented. You said that the LLM chooses when to use them.

The LLM sits behind the toolkit which sits behind the guardrails. Are you sure you understand how they work?

The guardrails monitor your input, the output of the LLM, and modify the output to suit, including terminating the chat.

Re: How AI knows things no one told it

#78

Post by mike741 »

titaniczero wrote: post #66
mike741 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why can't statistics alone generate emergent phenomena? because there is no generative mechanism in the definition of "statistics" with which to generate anything. > What convinces you that the human brain isn't also just statistics at a massive scale? Because the human brain created the concept of "statistics" so if statistics created the human brain this would mean statistics created statistics, leading to infini…

But the idea that the brain functions on a basis of complex statistical processes doesn't imply that statistics created the brain itself, it just suggests that the brain's processes can be modeled/understood through the lens of statistical methods. Statistics is just how we describe a tool we invented to analyze observable data, the brain could be a similar tool and it doesn't need to be the same tool. It's akin to s…

> the idea that the brain functions on a basis of complex statistical processes doesn't imply that statistics created the brain itself

Agreed. However, the phrasing and context of the question did imply the brain is "just statistics" and somehow emerged from statistics. If we are to interpret this as "the brain functions on just statistics" then the answer is still "it does not" because the brain can be said to function on countless different systems simultaneously, such as pure counting, algebra, calculus, etc which would mean that its not "just statistics."

> It's akin to saying that we created the concept of "physics"

This will boil down to our exact definitions, but most people conceive of physics as having a generative mechanism. If something were to ever be "created", like an atom or a new car, we would retroactively declare it to have been created in accordance with "the laws of physics." We wouldn't make the same retroactive assessment with something like "the rules of chess" because there is nothing in the rules of chess justifying such a creation. So we choose to give physics a special status.

> we can use statistics to find functions that fit any real (ground truth) function

A given statistical model might fit a function of the universe, but so might other models. Physics describe a function of the universe, chemistry describes a function of the universe, biology describes a function of the universe, politics describe a function of the universe. Describing a ground truth is one thing, elevating the description itself to the status of ground truth is another.

Re: How AI knows things no one told it

#79

Post by famouswaffles »

hammyhavoc wrote: post #77
famouswaffles wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Source for what ? Do you have any idea of what you're talking about ? Hold on, How do you think Language models work ? What do you think the plain English Instructions are for ?

A source for how guardrails function as what you state isn't what's documented. You said that the LLM chooses when to use them. The LLM sits behind the toolkit which sits behind the guardrails. Are you sure you understand how they work? The guardrails monitor your input, the output of the LLM, and modify the output to suit, including terminating the chat.

It should be in line with the likes of this - https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.04761 or https://twitter.com/minosvasilias/status/1627076214639976449

I didn't say guardrail to mean anything particularly elaborate. The pre-prompt for Bing has instructions to avoid adversarial arguments.

Re: How AI knows things no one told it

#80

Post by mercer »

deadbolt wrote: post #60
gfody wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is some number which we are no more complex than I bet that number is 808017424794512875886459904961710757005754368000000000

For people who, like me, didn't recognize the number: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monster_group

I love how I didn't understand practically anything from that page. Trying not to keep clicking...
Post reply on HN