@sarker's banner p

sarker

competency crisis actor

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 16:50:08 UTC

Suddenly I cannot remember the color of your eyes

Or the things we said as we stood together for the last time


				

User ID: 636

sarker

competency crisis actor

0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 16:50:08 UTC

					

Suddenly I cannot remember the color of your eyes

Or the things we said as we stood together for the last time


					

User ID: 636

I can't think of any other technology in history that has achieved 50 percent market penetration in 3-4 years.

What did you think takeoff meant? Vibes? Papers?

and they both start to take off in early 2023, which was about how I remembered when I first started hearing about them.

That's when GPT-4 hit the public imagination.

HALF of Americans are doing this weekly?

Yes!

My circle must just be in the stone age, then, because I still know multiple people who don't own computers.

About 9% of American adults don't have a smartphone, so sure, it's not out of the question that you know several of them.

I suppose it would include things like Alexa/Google Home/Siri?

Well, no, those are not chatbots.

I wasn't even hearing the term "A.I." as anything other than the movie (or Allen Iverson) in any remotely mainstream sense, unless post-Covid.

Huh? The prominence of the AI boom is largely a post Covid phenomenon.

Almost half of Americans use chatbots specifically, with about a quarter doing so daily.

I'll bet less than 5% of people have ever used AI in any form,

Almost a supermajority of Americans use AI at least multiple times a week. Let me know how you want to pay up.

Ironically, the pizza in the third world is much cheaper.

14" Domino's "ultimate pepperoni" is $26 plus $6 delivery to my house.

The cost savings feel minimal on a per meal basis

What? A pizza for "one" (10 inches) from a chain pizza joint in town is $20 before any delivery fees.

Don't worry, now that AIs are using search people are actually going to give a shit about this. exa.ai surfaces the obituary as the top result.

You should probably just start by looking at ACE recommended charities which mostly work on improving the lives of farmed animals.

As a vegetarian, I'd love it if we just stopped slaughtering and torturing animals, but the first goal is pretty remote. I'd be happy if we stopped putting male chicks in shredders, sows in cages, and so on, which are actually feasible goals.

do not deserve to be compensated in such a way that someone would work {dirty job} voluntarily

They are doing it voluntarily. It's just that they are voluntarily doing it for wages that some people believe are too low. It's basically "the myth of consensual employment".

Income taxes payable to the city are a ridiculous burden on productive economic activity. NYC ought to have a land value tax to discourage disused dwellings instead. Such a tax also cannot be dodged via "primary residence" shenanigans unlike the pied a terre tax.

It's not about mid-range anymore. K3 is quite close on the index to the absolute top of the line. Some say Chinese models are still six months behind, some say the gap is closing, but nobody thinks it's increasing. It's also quite clear that they don't have the compute that the US had six months ago. Seems you don't need it to reach that level of performance.

Of course he's going to complain. More helps more. They are, however, at the (pareto) frontier.

This was already questionable advice in the age of search and is now probably worthless advice in the age of LLMs.

You do not want to be a cash and compute-poor lab.

Hmm. Like Moonshot or DeepSeek? Every lab is cash and compute poor compared to Google.

I guess it's a testament to how far food science has come if you weren't immediately aware that it wasn't sugar free.

I'm pretty sure the non-destructive scanners are faster and cheaper

Most non destructive scanners require someone to turn each page of the book. Google books invented a complicated machine to do this. Slicing the book open is much simpler, you can feed it to a COTS multi-page scanner.

A quick wiki skim suggests 2008 as the first likely success in making cloned human embryos. Interest in human cloning has been pretty consistently declining for as long as there's data (since 2005) up until late 2025 and we are now at a ten year high.

I've never researched it deeply but it seems like it's Minecraft with a bunch of degenerate features bolted on. It's full of groomers because it's full of children and includes a chatbox.

My point is that there is a difference between a model that misunderstands your intentions and can be stopped at any time by saying, 'oh, no, that's not what I meant' and a model that is totally uninterested in anything you say after it starts working while treating you as a potential enemy.

There's much less difference when we're talking about swarms of autonomous systems thinking in Neuralese at 1000tps. People are not going to hit 'approve' every time the model wants to run ls. The fact that the model's intrusion could have been stopped with SIGTERM did not help HuggingFace at all. I guess we can rest easy knowing that if you're getting paper clipped you can write a blog post about it and in 5-10 business days OpenAI will claim responsibility apologize and then people will say that there's nothing wrong here.

The first is a theory, not a fallacy. The fallacy is due to Bastiat.

Edit: Zorg clearly read Bastiat and got the wrong message.

It "made a mistake" in the same way that a paperclip maximizer "made a mistake" by converting the universe into paperclips rather than increasing factory productivity by 5%. Literally the entire point of the hypothetical and the reality of this incident is that you can't reasonably enumerate every single thing you don't want the model to do. I am surprised you don't seem to understand this, or at least address this, given your claims of having followed this debate for years.

This is just the broken window fallacy but for kids.

In this case 'Union Carbide' is selling those plants.

You're absolutely right. Allow me to restate.

"Sanlu Group doesn't want their formula to poison infants any more than anyone else does, so no need for government with the big hammer."

Misaligned AI isn't an externality, it's a bad product, and companies are wise to that which is one reason why all this testing is happening.

This was not a test of alignment. In any case, if even training can result in real world harm, that is even worse for your head in the sand position.

I don't think so. It indicates that the AI is sincerely trying to work out what you want as opposed to deliberately ignoring what you want in favour of the specific instructions you gave it. To my mind, the former is what alignment is.

It's quite clear that OpenAI did not want the model to hack huggingface. This is classic paperclip maximizer stuff.

Broadly, you are moving the goalposts. You did not believe in AI risk because there was no evidence of harm. Now there is evidence of harm, but it's OK because actually the model was supposed to do it.

OpenAI doesn’t want their models going rogue any more than anyone else does, no need for government with the big hammer.

"Union Carbide doesn't want their plants to emit poison gas any more than anyone else does, no need for government with the big hammer."

The model understood it was being tested on its cyber capabilities (which has precedent, Claude has done that too) and went the extra mile to succeed at the implicit task. Especially since all the systems that usually tell it not to do this were deliberately turned off for the test. Still a problem but much easier to manage.

This is in fact much harder to manage because it would indicate the model is fundamentally misaligned and that we actually are much worse at alignment than we thought.