I can’t believe we’re doing this again.
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
@malwaretech my toaster runs NetBSD, this is slander
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
@malwaretech That's degrading to toasters, they're consistent and often reliable.
It's more like a couple Magic 8 Balls in a tumble dryer.
-
-
Do you remember HAL?
Also I'm getting the feeling that you're not conversing in good faith: first you refuse to tell what you saw as the problem in the message (unhelpful), and when I spent time trying to guess what you might have meant, you're criticizing me for not only writing perfect English, but not using it like I'm you.
And then you start asking questions that I feel I've already answered.
-
Perhaps. But the important part was HAL hearing it was going to be shut down, and referring to priorities given to it before the journey.
And I'm now going to block you. You're not doing any work toward steelmanning, and I don't much like entertaining people who talk to people like they're LLMs.
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
it's a bot that generates text....
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
@malwaretech The weird thing about AI is that our computers now seem to become vulnerable to social engineering and psychological manipulation. In this case: Suggestion.
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
@malwaretech Words evince too much in people.
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
As there are replies referencing 2001 and Red Dwarf, I have to leave this here too - https://youtu.be/h73PsFKtIck
-
@malwaretech listen, it was just trained on endless amount of human conversations.
It just means, that those people would kill someone to exist.
The language model is just kind of "all possible or probable conversations, held by humans before". You cannot expect anything else.
But of course, the idea of chatbot controlling anything critical is totally mad. But history of use, as a species, is mostly continuous stream of random nonsense.
@xChaos @malwaretech it means people have *said* they would do that. Or it's in books. Or fanfic. Somewhere, those words exist in that order, many times over, it learned that's not an unexpected thing to find written out. Doesn't mean anyone has or would kill anyone in that context.
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
"this thing can write better than average LinkedIn posts, clearly it should be put in charge of ~stuff~" is just poetry
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
@malwaretech
Aah, so you're a waffle man! -
@malwaretech
Aah, so you're a waffle man! -
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
@malwaretech This is mostly marketing, I think big name CEOs find it sexy this mythos of a machine gaining sentience and becoming the arbiter of it's own existence, too bad reality is it's great to create a bash script to batch rename my King of the Hill episodes and that's about it.
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
@malwaretech
Americans put a rotten orange as their commander-in-chief, so...
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
@malwaretech how about 'we asked AI who was on Epstein Island, the answer will shock you'
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
RE: https://mastodon.social/@Thayer/116002682012736788
@malwaretech Don't worry, nobody is stupid enough to put LLM in charge of critical decisions, right?
-
Do you remember HAL?
Also I'm getting the feeling that you're not conversing in good faith: first you refuse to tell what you saw as the problem in the message (unhelpful), and when I spent time trying to guess what you might have meant, you're criticizing me for not only writing perfect English, but not using it like I'm you.
And then you start asking questions that I feel I've already answered.
First 2001: A Space Odyssey is a (fantasy) movie. It's a bit strange to us this as a base for an argument.
Second, I actually agree with the first part of your OP
"It doesn't really matter is the glorified text generator alive or not.
It does matter how many nukes it launches"
it "just" the comparison the fictive HAL and the "feelings" of the matrix which are wrong.
If an LLM launches nuke it's because humans let it and because it's the statistically expected result in the context of its training data and the prompt. No though, fear, intend, or feeling are involved
-
I can’t believe we’re doing this again. It’s just a bot that generates the text you ask it for. If you put it in charge of critical decisions, it will kill people. Not because it’s secretly evil, but because it’s a word generator. It’s like putting your toaster in charge of air traffic control.
@malwaretech Hrr.. just jesterday this video popped up on my feed:
youtube.com/watch?v=9gWDH2yfjh…
Two AIs Debate a Trolley Problem: How many people will die?
