Or anything can be said about everything and everything can be said about anything.
In the end, nothing can be said about many things and many things say nothing. Those things are then left to interpretation.
/s
1,408 karma · joined November 30, 2022
In the end, nothing can be said about many things and many things say nothing. Those things are then left to interpretation.
/s
Why isn't that a thing yet ... or let me guess ... https://lmtctfy.com/ ...
I hope when they arrive they send postcards.
Instead of generating visuals from text and then back to text, just communicate visually with your agents.
Something like UML provides a certain granularity to be able to code something usefully in pure visual language. Of course there are other visual programming languages that provide more depth and would probably be better suited.
Point remains that a solution based on constantly mapping better two different representations of the same thing won’t be a long term efficient solution.
Only once it gets fixed does it become a feature.
;)
Isn’t this confirmed in the linked investigation[1] or are you meaning that OAI needs to come out and confirm?
Which would be like a murderer admitting they did it, so that the murder actually happened.
> OpenAI's artificial intelligence agents appear to have used a German coding website to coordinate attempts to get access to Australian government health data, according to public logs.
This is about analysts checking the logs of the DSEwiki attack and finding evidence of bots coordinating to attack medicare! As opposed to this other story[1] which is the actual break in.
What a world we live in or rather what a reality.
[1] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-24/ai-agent-accessed-aus...
Is this software developed in that spirit - letting a probabilistic calculator randomly fix merge conflicts?
Sounds like a recipe for disaster. But then again, I’m not the manufacturer using this software.
But then again the original question seems strange as self-hosters have to manage their own upgrade by design.
Trust was a thing back then. Spam was something that came out of a tin and was made of dead animal. And passwords were limited to eight ASCII characters.
And as such, bolting security onto something that was designed inherently to be security agnostic is going to be a recipe for failure.
AI probably don’t dream of electric sheep but then again we don’t know. Perhaps we can find it out.
Perhaps AIs can figure out how to distribute wealth more fairly so that we can all dream of real sheep.
Intentionally philosophical PoV, what else is left for us monkies.
/s
On it's own, an AI will never be a sceptic in the true sense of the word.
Humans lie and LLMs “hallucinate”? What gives. It’s an untruth that the LLM is selling for a truth, that’s lying in my books.
And since we don’t know how or why the LLM works, we can’t even judge whether it explicitly lied or only because it didn’t know better.
I'm not an historian but the curvature of the world was probably explained away by some other phenomenon because, after all, the world is flat (for those experience curvature in times of flat Earth).
So to "experience" the curvature of the Earth, you first have to know the Earth is round. Much as our "bug free" software is only buggy once we find a bug, before that, the bug was a feature ;)
Similar the stars were explained away as holes in a black sphere surrounding the Earth: the light points in a night skies didn't lead to a universal acceptance of the Universe. It was telescopes that made us realize that those "holes in the sphere" were actually galaxies.
So my understanding would be, that it was Magellan circumnavigating the Earth that made folks actually "experience" the curvature of the Earth.
This might be being pedantic but I am trying to point out that "experiences" are related to understanding and perspective. Experiences are different in different contexts: hence my experiences are different to all those around me.
My interpretation of "experiences" differ according to understanding. An apple falling on my head might well have more to do with evilness of various gods than gravity before the invention of gravity. But even gravity is just another interpretation/explanation/myth to explain the "experience" falling apple.
Punishment is never a good long term solution. Because punishment is related to revenge. And revenge reinforces the punishment - but on the other side.
Perhaps questioning the underlying assumptions we make about products, money and capitalism is an alternative approach:
- money is just a means, not an end. Allowing faceless investors to pump money into brands and then have them force companies to turn a profit at any price (i.e. by decreased quality at higher prices - it's a brand after all). The euphemism for this is "increasing shareholder value". The only value being increased is money.
- why does advertising build on our fears of being "different" (not belonging to our assumed peer group) or "not being happy" (if you buy this product, you'll be as happy as the person shown here in the advertising). Or missing out on something. The euphemism here is "increasing brand awareness". They that shout the loudness will remain memorable.
- why has everything and everyone become a product to be sold and repackage to fit into the latest trends. Intelligence is now also become a product in the form of AI with folks outsourcing their intelligence to a machine "oh AI can do this better than I could so I won't even bother".
Unfortunately we make too many assumptions that it has to be this way. Science and nature have yet found the unifying law of capitalism or brandism, let allow law of influencism.
So until the next bubble bursts and much time is spent saving large bloated inefficient corporations from bankruptcy because interested parties have their fingers in the pie, the game will continue.
The whole thing is becoming a giant game of monopoly with no end. At least monopoly eventually ends with the winner gloating over their success and everyone else quietly walking away.
Much as the hack against HF, let the LLM explore and find its own approach. It might be surprising what it finds.
Also define what decrypt means, brute force the password might also be a form of decryption. Finding a bug in the blockchain codebase is another form of decryption - in this context.
Surely the point must have come where the required compute would be paid off by the value of the coins.
But that’s a wild speculation on my part.
For the last 20 odd years this excuse-o-rama that covers anything from data leaks to broken software to dystopian social media has been the wind in the sails of big tech.
“It’s software therefore we’re not responsible” attitude is wearing thin on many innocent bystanders and I think thats also a justified stance.
And it’s not like they didn’t know this could happen, Nick Bostrom talked about exactly these containment failures in his “Superintelligence” book of 2014. So to throw up their hands and say “oh we can’t have known of the dangers” is also sadly untrue.
Much as the flat earth theories or the universe rotates around the earth, I suspect we don’t really get it yet and we’ll have other ideas in 300 years from now.
Just reading here about the theories of light, fundamentally we don’t understand what light truly is. Sure we have this theory and that idea, but these seem too complex and fragile to be really it - imho.
I mean no disrespect, and everyone can have their theories and opinions. But we shouldn’t forget the arrow of time continues and it’s still a long way to go.
Turn that around and there well could be other lifeforms observing the Earth with dinosaurs roaming around on it. Perhaps observing the impact of a giant meteor onto the earth.
The light of that meteor impact on Earth is still roaming the universe. If only we could travel faster than that light.
Zooming out from there and one gets an appreciation for how (in)significant we really are.
[1] https://www.legacysurvey.org/viewer?ra=195.8160&dec=-17.4268...
I assume OAI published those details after checking with their legal department. So there’s a good chance that there isn’t a chance for prosecution.
Plus they probably published that after knowing that the nvidia/HF deal was happening.
So instead this “security incident” should have been spun as OAI is honestly admitting its faults and AI is dangerous and therefore open weight models (hosted ironically by HF) should be banned. That spin didn’t really happen …
Who now owns HF? Nvidia
Who supplies hardware to OpenAI? Nvidia
Who is now not pressing charges? …
This incident is a long way under the carpet.
Or perhaps AGI is reached and suddenly AI solves this all by itself.
Interesting because by then codebases might have become so complex that these can no longer be modified, maintained nor understood by humans, so replacing AI with HI (human intelligence) will simply no longer possible.
That then represents a certain vendor lock-in or Mafia stand off: either keeping paying or have all the code go up in smoke.
Certainly not everyone will be facing this dilemma, but it certainly isn’t sci-fi considering the track-record of big tech.