par1970

6 ms·

1.
by par1970 8d ago
How did they know that people wouldn't find a way to use "the dataset, training code, or GPT‑2 model weights" to "generate misleading news articles, impersonate others online, automate the production of abusive or faked
2.
by par1970 8d ago
So you aren't claiming that they said GPT-2 was dangerous in the sense that it could disempower humanity, kill all humans, etc. You are just claiming that OpenAI execs said that GPT-2 might "generate misleading news articles, impe
3.
by par1970 8d ago
> those very same people had touted GPT-2 as a dangerous model Where did they say this at? AFAIK this is the original GPT-2 announcement: https://openai.com/index/better-language-models/ . Here are some direct q
4.
by par1970 8d ago
You said this: "Screams of propaganda. Sama saying GPT-2 is too dangerous to release…all over again." So show me Sam's "too dangerous to release" propaganda for GPT-2.
5.
by par1970 8d ago
AFAIK this is the document that talks about GPT-2 being dangerous: https://openai.com/index/better-language-models/ Here are some direct quotes: “We can also imagine the application of these models for malicious p
6.
by par1970 8d ago
This is the way. And, this is just for us girls, notice that Anthropic just believing that they are making a machine god is sufficient for their public announcements to not jUsT bE mArKeTiNg.
7.
by par1970 8d ago
So what is your credence that they will build a machine god in the next twenty years?
8.
by par1970 21d ago
If I present as cynical, will people just believe me when I don't provide any justification?
9.
by par1970 1mo ago
Are you claiming that the most likely way to please the user is to do something that will lead you to having to say "I cheated."?
10.
by par1970 1mo ago
LLMs are just sophisticated PR generating tools for chip manufacturers and tools just do what we tell them to do, so you're wrong. qed
11.
by par1970 1mo ago
Putting aside whether Andrew's shock is appropriate, it seems like we agree that current agents at least occasionally do things that are straightforwardly against the interests of the prompter when given mundane prompts like "Get
12.
by par1970 1mo ago
Right.
13.
by par1970 1mo ago
That doesn't make sense. LLMs just do what we tell them to do. It's similar to if I ask you for twenty bucks because I forgot my wallet and then you rob some guy to give me the twenty bucks, that's just what I asked you to
14.
by par1970 1mo ago
> Seems to me like it was doing what it was asked to do? Maybe it's what he asked it to do, but it's not what he wanted it to do. Which we know because (a) normal people don't want to break the law to get into a gym class
15.
by par1970 2mo ago
qed
16.
by par1970 2mo ago
edit: racism is bad
17.
by par1970 2mo ago
That’s fucking sick.
18.
by par1970 4mo ago
> AI (in this form) will never be able to solve things we truly cannot solve yet. Argument?
19.
by par1970 4mo ago
> LLMs are nothing close to AGI and not going to lead to it, they can’t distinguish right from wrong, they can’t count, they can’t reason, they generate plausible text from a vast databank of connected text. Argument? Are LLMs close to b
20.
by par1970 4mo ago
Which doomer argument have you found what problem with?
21.
by par1970 5mo ago
Do you deny the reported bug finding capabilities, or do you deny that they are dangerous?
22.
by par1970 5mo ago
I think this is roughly solved. Tell the agent to do all of its calculations in python.
23.
by par1970 5mo ago
Do you have a defense of why human-hammer-nail is a good analogy for human-chatgpt5.4-pwndsamsung?
24.
by par1970 6mo ago
But the service also tells criminals and adversaries about the bomb locations.
25.
by par1970 6mo ago
Yeah, maybe you are right. But is doing math and reasoning about Turing machines a priori? If so, then it seems plausible to me that reasoning about a codebase (without running it) is also ‘a priori’.
26.
by par1970 6mo ago
> What do you mean "a priori understanding codebases"? I took him to be distinguishing between (1) just reading the code/docs and reasoning about it, and (2) that + crafting and running tests.
27.
by par1970 6mo ago
Why?
28.
by par1970 6mo ago
Did you tell it that it should test, or did you have it generate actual tests that you could run if you wanted to?
29.
by par1970 6mo ago
How much domain experience do you have? Is it helping you solve problems for paying customers?
30.
by par1970 6mo ago
If your project requires the solution of a tricky algorithmic issue, then is the AI system able to solve that part, or do you have to give it the solution?

More ›