Live data from Hacker News

Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

anthropic.com

81–90 of 99 posts

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#81
post #49
post #3

There's no doubt that LLMs massively expand the ability of agencies like the NSA to perform large-scale surveillance at a higher quality. I wonder if Anthropic (or other LLM providers) ever push back or restrict these kinds of use cases? Or is that too risky for them?

dumb question. I can understand LLM can be used for disinformation as it can generate text/image at scale. can you explain how it can do large scale surveillance?

I wouldn't say that they can be used to do large-scale surveillance, but they can definitely facilitate it, especially with CV integration. I think one can easily imagine the following scenario: you fill a LLM with photos from people (taken from a public camera for instance), it finds the closest matches (via a web search for instance, as Gemini does). From then, you can easily gather the most essential information: first and last name, age, usernames... And then use this information to structure even more precise prompts and find even more potentially interesting data: posts on forums, relatives... And with this data, you can create an exhaustive database with a plethora of information and data about these people.

That's what any good stalker or person experienced with social engineering is able to do right now, but it takes a lot of time and energy. Resorting to LLMs would considerably decrease both. And it gets easier the more people you have information about.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#82
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

dumb question. I can understand LLM can be used for disinformation as it can generate text/image at scale. can you explain how it can do large scale surveillance?

I wouldn't say that they can be used to do large-scale surveillance, but they can definitely facilitate it, especially with CV integration. I think one can easily imagine the following scenario: you fill a LLM with photos from people (taken from a public camera for instance), it finds the closest matches (via a web search for instance, as Gemini does). From then, you can easily gather the most essential information:…

Specifically, vision transformers (ViT) outperforming established CNN.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have it write a program to analyze it. I think a lot of people fail to understand that you don't always need the LLM to do the thing, have it write a program to do the thing for you.

Okay, but you still need to debug the program. If your program must give correct results you still need to check the program output against every case. There's no free lunch there.

You're right. That's why to be sure I don't use software. All paper and pencil. So I can be sure. I have no idea what your point is.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting how we dismiss anyone caring about things other than profit as virtue signally. Anthropic was founded by people who seemed to legitimately care about AI safety. It's possible the current conglomeration that is the company doesn't, but I wouldn't be so quick to assume that.

Calling something virtue signaling is not a dismissal of people caring about things other than profit. It's a statement of belief that they don't actually care about things other than profit and are just pretending that they do. There's a pretty clear financial incentive to virtue signal since getting the benefit of the doubt from society lets them make more profit with less scrutiny. There's also no benefit for soci…

Yes I agree that's the intent, but I think it can often be used by people who think the thing being "virtue" signaled about isn't important. People who think that corporations aren't going far enough in support of their social issue sometimes accuse them of virtue signally, but people opposed to people viewing the issue as important do all the time.

The prevailing wisdom on Hacker News now is that actually people who say they care about AI safety are mostly lying and any road blocks they try to put up are motivated by greed. It feels very much like someone accusing a company talking about responsible forestry and advocating for higher standards in the forest cutting business of virtue signaling

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#85
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boy, I can’t wait for the foundation of my house to disappear because the LLM mis-classified a drilling report as non-hazardous. What’s the deal here with liability and accountability? That’s a serious problem when considering using these for anything other than toy problems.

>Boy, I can’t wait for the foundation of my house to disappear because the LLM mis-classified a drilling report as non-hazardous LMAO! It's so hilarious that people like you forget that the alternative is relying on bureaucracies managed by people that get things wrong more often and are both too lazy and too stubborn to process your application to review your drilling report again. If using both human-level and AI-l…

What are 'people like me'? It's not like I know nothing about large language models, I just think using them for civil engineering is a bad idea...

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, but you still need to debug the program. If your program must give correct results you still need to check the program output against every case. There's no free lunch there.

You're right. That's why to be sure I don't use software. All paper and pencil. So I can be sure . I have no idea what your point is.

I'm fine with writing software. I do so for a living. Usually when I'm responsible for a piece of software being correct, I'm the one who wrote it and not a black box. I use AI to autocomplete my code all the time and it very frequently suggests the wrong thing and attempts to insert random bugs.

So if my ass was on the line for the output of an AI-written program being correct for 30k cases of parsing unstructured or mixed data I would be extremely careful. That is my point.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#87
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NSA should be training their own GPT-4 or better model as we speak and should have been doing it for a long while now. Anything else is borderline incompetence.

NSA can't hire the right talent capable of producing that product for the same reason they have trouble finding white-hat security people to hire: You can't work for the government and do drugs in your personal time. Enough of the pie of elite researchers are in to wacky mind-bending that it's a real recruitment problem.

You don't think compensation is the bigger issue?

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#88
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't actually think the LLM is reviewing those 30k documents do you? You tell it to write a program (which is easy to audit) to pull the info from the PDFs or whatever. I don't get why this crowd is so goddamn unimaginative with LLMs.

> You tell it to write a program (which is easy to audit) to pull the info from the PDFs Wherein you discover that unless you ask it to consider the fact that PDFs are ... very hard to parse [1] [2] you get something that misses whole blocks of text or turns them into something they aren't and the rest of the program misses chunks of the document. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22473263 [2]: https://web.ar…

Why are you expecting they are all very different? They're all likely very similar.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't actually think the LLM is reviewing those 30k documents do you? You tell it to write a program (which is easy to audit) to pull the info from the PDFs or whatever. I don't get why this crowd is so goddamn unimaginative with LLMs.

Because I've heard of enough lazy uses of LLMs to be suspicious. Auditing the program means being sure that the info pulled from those documents is reviewed properly. Also, a complete lack of regard for other people's privacy.

No idea where privacy enters in here.

Re: Anthropic: Expanding Access to Claude for Government

#90
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have it write a program to analyze it. I think a lot of people fail to understand that you don't always need the LLM to do the thing, have it write a program to do the thing for you.

That's not very likely to succeed, is it? LLMs can do a lot of things, but writing software that not only parses semi-proprietary file formats but also analyze unstructured data sounds more than little bit far fetched. I'd be impressed if just the first, and by far the easiest, part of that can be accomplished.

It's extremely likely to succeed because there is a documented format. I can't believe how pessimistic this site is about this stuff. Yeah, you're not going to one shot it with a prompt. If that's your expectation, you're confused.
Post reply on HN