> I mean -- if nobody's surprised, then nobody has learned anything, and then what was the point of doing all this work?
I strongly disagree with this view on science. It's extremely valuable to scientifically validate prior assumptions.
I strongly disagree with this view on science. It's extremely valuable to scientifically validate prior assumptions.
On the other hand, this work isn't even framed as a generalizable assumption that needed to be validated. It seems to me to be "just another example of how AI systems can be strategically deceptive for self-preservation."