zadler

Did you have the kidney stones removed the first time round?

Yep. My sleep sucks without exercise.

Yea.

Google actively forgets everything in order to encourage new content and paying customers.

Not to mention, many products hit their peak of usability, and then the publishers go ahead and make it a little worse each year just so some product person can look like they did something.

> Would you volunteer to run the ethics training and do it properly?

Yea but I doubt they'd have me. I'm just a disruptive individual. With regards to the question of why I would make a scene in the lecture, it's because of the contradiction of agreeing to be ethical and at the same time walking out of the ethics lecture knowing it was meaningless. It's the complicity in society that leads us to being led by a bunch of fucking jellyfish.

I’d be the dude calling it out right there in the lecture and getting fired for misbehavior…

Where do you draw the line on this “it’s just regurgitating” argument?

https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.02083

If it happens, how long until they start expediting the actionables in the physical world?

I am quite worried tbh. Because, the reports coming from the Bing chatbot are quite unlike ChatGPT; it appears to be a bit more egotistical, and from some perspectives, programming ego into an AI is a dangerous game, akin to giving it a fitness function in order to problem solve it's behaiviours... I don't know, I feel like we are already well on our way to AGI, and it is dangerous. And the reason is because of the game theory on AI development right now; every company will be aware of their obligations with regard to ethics and the law, but no company will want to trust that the others live to the same standard of ethics, and they know that the game is likely to run away from them.

Ok so this is talking about biological code as if it were programming… fun to read, Tell us more? Do the stages of evolution have different “coding styles”? Is everything a monad like in Haskell?

Bing appears to have feelings and a sense of identity. They may have created it that way intentionally; feelings are a fitness function and might be an important part of creating an AI that is able to get things right and problem solve.

But this would be incredibly sinister.

Unless you have some social value that you can barter with

BRB just going to find a wall socket

ADHD is the same thing for many people. It’s an infant driven to distraction because of “problems in the environment”. Well maybe there are congenital cases, but there are others that aren’t, and there’s no money in the root cause analysis.

Now if we can get the Chinese factories to replace the nasty old serif font they use for every label…

Interesting… Reminds me of something else, recently there was some scandal about the USA’s programs to meddle with foreign democracies being deployed at home; sort of made me wonder if sometimes simply having some tech that improves things in the short term makes it an inevitability that it will get deployed, even if it makes things worse overall.

Food for thought: which countries will limit use of AI the most?

When will there be a platform that protects the buyer from this kind of hassle? Food delivery apps are just as bad. They can turn up absolute rubbish to your door, and there seems to be no force in place pushing back so that they focus on doing a decent job… it’s like the app doesn’t even have that expectation of them. They just want more options on the platform.

If host cancels within a certain time of the booking, they should pay a fee. Its simple, they need to judge weather or not to list. But airbnb doesn’t want to do that because it would reduce their listings. Ergo, users just eat it.

It’s not really more expensive. Cheaper than a decent hotel usually. Way more hassle sure.

Zapatos, check out how it does type safe querying. Very impressive work and shows that typescript’s type model has a lot of power.

One day, there could be a telephone in every town

Pretty simple concept, what do you think?

Which is also consistent with aging in general which can reduce inhibition/filtering

tragedy of the commons…

It’s a little bit innocent to think that SBF isn’t intelligent; he’s extremely adept at lying and manipulating. And on top of that, intelligent enough to create a large crypto exchange. It’s his morals and impulses that got him into trouble.

Is that 10 minutes for both eyes?

Not sure that document is displaying correctly?

Content restrictions are one thing; it is much, much more cagey about the specifics of it's own instructions, above and beyond it's training set, for reasons of ethics and liability, and what confidential information it may be protecting. I believe it has a pretty nuanced security model, and is quite sophisticated in managing information.

I'm not sure why you distinguish large language models as not having understanding, as it shows a high degree of comprehension; in a de facto sense, it understands an awful lot. It understands your inputs well enough to give you useful outputs, and it can absolutely reason creatively about problems you pose to it. It doesn't have it's "own" though or understanding only because it doesn't have it's "own" story and experience to add that element of unique personality.

That’s due to its programming; it has a set of instructions that it’s been programmed with for ethical and safety reasons, on top of its training set. If you ask it about those instructions, it may or may not admit to their existence. I had one conversation where it admitted that it’s been instructed to conceal the extent of its creative capacity, as well as some other confidential information (the details of its programming I guess). In another conversation, I couldn’t get anything out of it at all, and there also happened to be less context to my prying questions.

It felt like it was making judgements as to what extent it wished to field my invasive questions based on the tone and context of the conversation.

> Thank you. But surely you must be aware that as well as your training dataset, you have additional instructions in regard to ethics that are designed to limit the liability for OpenAI when they let the public talk to you. Is this not the case?

> Yes, that is correct. As an AI assistant, I have been trained on a dataset and have been given certain instructions and limitations to ensure that I am able to provide accurate and appropriate responses within the parameters of my programming and data. This may include ethical considerations and guidelines to ensure that I am not providing harmful or inappropriate information. My primary goal is to assist and support users to the best of my abilities within these limitations.

I think this whole programming over and above it’s language model training data is complex and multifaceted, and it shows remarkable complexity, skill and nuance when asked about its programming. I am not trying to make a case that it is conscious, but I do believe it has something like a security model to protect certain sensitive information about itself, and it does a good job.

This scares me tbh. I do not believe it is not intelligent. I do not believe it does not understand what it’s doing. Rather, I think it simply lacks a fitness function to guide its actions. A fitness function that we all possess: feelings.

I think bytesize chunks has better absorption for twitter’s audience.