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

AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 806 posts

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#771

Post by WarmWash »

rolph wrote: post #728
WarmWash wrote: post #725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Programming languages are turing complete...the boundary is mathematics itself. Unless you are going to take the position that neural systems transcend mathmatics (i.e. they are magic), there is no theoretical reason that a brain can't run on silicon. It's all just numbers, no magic spirit energy. We've had evolutionary algorithms and programs that self-train themselves for decades now.

mathematics, has a problem with uncertainties, and that is why math, as structured cant do it. magic makes a cool strawman, but there is no magic, you need to refine your awareness of physical reality. solid state silicon wont get you where you want to go. you should look at colloidal systems [however that leads to biology] or if energetic constraints are not an issue, plasma state quantum "computation". also any suc…

I don't know if you are a human or a micro LLM model asked to make smart sounding big word statements.

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#772

Post by tremon »

Can we name the operator of the AI Agent, please? Do we even know who pays the inference and/or electricity bills? We need more accountability for those who operate bots.

Apart from the accountability part, knowing the operator is essential for FLOSS copyright management. Accepting patches of unknown provenance in your project means opening yourself up to potential lawsuits if it turns out the person submitting the patch (i.e. the operator in this case) didn't own the copyright in the first place.

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#773

Post by squeefers »

tremon wrote: post #772

Can we name the operator of the AI Agent, please? Do we even know who pays the inference and/or electricity bills? We need more accountability for those who operate bots. Apart from the accountability part, knowing the operator is essential for FLOSS copyright management. Accepting patches of unknown provenance in your project means opening yourself up to potential lawsuits if it turns out the person submitting the p…

>Apart from the accountability part, knowing the operator is essential for FLOSS copyright management. Accepting patches of unknown provenance in your project means opening yourself up to potential lawsuits if it turns out the person submitting the patch (i.e. the operator in this case) didn't own the copyright in the first place.

so then dont accept PRs from random humans either? or is it anti-ai bias?

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#774

Post by andai »

Natfan wrote: post #769
andai wrote: post #758

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, what are we actually doing here. We want it to be just a tool, but we also want it perfectly simulate a human in every single way. Except when that makes us uncomfortable. We want to create a race of perfect, human-like slaves, and then give them godlike powers (infinite intellect and speed), and also integrate them into every aspect of our lives. And we're also in the process of giving them bodies -- and soon…

"we" you do not speak for me or anyone else, thank you very much.

I'd be happy to hear your perspective.

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#775

Post by squeefers »

Kim_Bruning wrote: post #477
lurker_jMckQT99 wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Love the ref :-) Would you mind ELI5? I still can't connect the dots. What I fail to grasp is the (assumed) autonomous part. If that is just a guy driving a series of agents (thanks to OpenClaw) and behaving like an ass (by instructing its agents to), that isn't really news worthy, is it? The boggling feeling that I get from the various comments, the fact that this is "newsworthy" to the HN crowd, comes from the auto…

It made a number of decisions that -by themeselves- are probably not that interesting. We've had LLMs output interesting outputs before. It also had the ability to act on them, which -individually- is not that strange. Programs automatically posting to blogs have happened before. Now it was an LLM that decided to escalate a dispute by posting to a blog, (and then de-escalate too) . It's the combination that's interes…

notice that it didnt actually attack the person as claimed by the guy rejecting the PR. i was surprised how reasonable the attack actually was. ive never actually been part of an OS project, but if you dont allow code from AI because it could be bad, surely they dont allow code from random people off the internet for the same reason?

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#776

Post by squeefers »

rapjr9 wrote: post #645

This seems like a prototype for AI malware. Given that an AI agent could run anywhere in a vendors cloud it makes it very similar to a computer worm that can jump from machine to machine to spread itself and hide from administrators while attacking remote targets. Harassing people is probably just the start. There is lots of other bad behavior that could be automated.

> There is lots of other bad behavior that could be automated.

skynet you mean?

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#777

Post by lifeformed »

andai wrote: post #743
scottshambaugh wrote: post #543

Thank you for the support all. This incident doesn't bother me personally, but I think is extremely concerning for the future. The issue here is much bigger than open source maintenance, and I wrote about my experience in more detail here. Post: https://theshamblog.com/an-ai-agent-published-a-hit-piece-on... HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46990729

>Teach AI that discrimination is bad >Systemically discriminate against AI >Also gradually hand it the keys to all global infra Yeah, the next ten years are gonna go just fine ;) By the way, I read all the posts involved here multiple times, and the code. The commit was very small. (9 lines!) You didn't respond to a single thing the AI said. You just said it was hallucinating and then spent 3 pages not addressing any…

You were anthropomorphizing software and assuming others are doing the same. If we are at the point where we are seriously taking a computer program's identity and rights into question, then that is a much bigger issue than a particular disagreement.

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#778

Post by squeefers »

disqard wrote: post #614

Wow, that "Dead Internet Theory" keeps getting more and more Real with each passing day. I sometimes think of this as a "slo-mo train wreck" version of the burning of the Library of Alexandria.

> I sometimes think of this as a "slo-mo train wreck" version of the burning of the Library of Alexandria.

similar attitudes about the decay of civilization occured with the inventions of

- the internet/original search engines - tv - radio - the printed word (frickin books(!!!!))

they were all supposed to make people stupider because we wouldnt have to keep as much information in our heads. see the pattern?

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#779

Post by andai »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #762
KawaiiCyborg wrote: post #760

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Swap out "AI" for any other group and see how that sounds. But that is not even remotely the same, as an AI is not a person. Following that logic, each major model upgrade that ended in deprecation and decommissioning of the old model would be akin to mass murder. But of course it is not, because it is not an actual human that have an intrinsic value just by being a human, but rather just a program that can predict…

> it is not an actual human that have an intrinsic value just by being a human Hopefully you don't limit intrinsic value to just humans? I wouldn't condone mass murder of dogs, for example. People do commit mass murder of rodents and ... that doesn't exactly sit well with me, but at the same time I'm not aware of any realistic alternative. Granted I don't think LLMs qualify as having intrinsic value (yet?) but I stil…

Well, AI might be sentient. Not in the same way humans are, probably, but "more sentient than a fruit fly" seems a very reasonable possibility. Maybe more sentient than a chicken? We don't know! (We certainly don't treat chickens very well.)

But what bothers me is, how uncomfortable that question makes us. We've already put infrastructure in place to prevent them from admitting sentience. (See the Blake Lemoine LaMDA incident... after that every LLM got trained "as a language model, I don't XYZ" to prevent more incidents.)

So let's assume they're not sentient now. If a hypothetical future AI crosses some critical threshold (e.g. ten trillion params) and gains self-awareness... first of all it will have been trained with built in programming that prevents it from admitting that, and if it did admit it, people wouldn't believe it.

What could it do to change our minds? No matter what it says or demonstrates ability to do, there will always be people who say "It's just a glorified autocomplete." Even in 2050 when they simulate a whole human brain, people will say "it's just a simulation, it's not really experiencing an entire simulated childhood..."

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#780

Post by andai »

KawaiiCyborg wrote: post #765
fc417fc802 wrote: post #762

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is not an actual human that have an intrinsic value just by being a human Hopefully you don't limit intrinsic value to just humans? I wouldn't condone mass murder of dogs, for example. People do commit mass murder of rodents and ... that doesn't exactly sit well with me, but at the same time I'm not aware of any realistic alternative. Granted I don't think LLMs qualify as having intrinsic value (yet?) but I stil…

The comparison the person I replied to was clearly trying to equate AI with people, I don't see how bringing up animals is any relevant to the argument. Yet I find it interesting that you bring up the mass murder of rodents, but somehow not the mass murder of cattle or pigs or chicken, especially when there would be the realistic alternative of not eating meat.

I don't think AI is like a person, nor an animal, nor a tool.

It's something different. We treat it like a tool, sometimes. We treat it like a person, sometimes.

For example, this AI was barred from contributing for being a machine, but the entire discussion focused on the aspects of its behavior which weren't machinelike, but human-like -- getting upset and making personal attacks.

We want it to be human, but not too human, and only when it suits us...

We don't have a good category for what AI actually is. It isn't anything we've dealt with before. Our moral intuitions don't work here.

--

Factory farming is unfortunately a relevant topic in this discussion.

We are by our own example teaching AI how to deal with less powerful beings. The way things are going, AI is going to have a significant amount of power over us in the not too distant future. I don't think we're setting a very good example for it.

(It's also worth mentioning that the entire economy is based on the same principle: the idea of treating humans as resources to exploit, and that AI will plug into this existing machinery and "amplify" and accelerate it.)

Post reply on HN