upvote

points

by mentalgear8 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby nozzlegear6 hours ago|
next
[-]
This AI 2027 thing is just a weird terminator fanfiction that AGI larpers like to flagellate themselves over. Like Nostradamus, it's easy to ignore everything it gets wrong because, well look at all the things it got right!

I've read it and wish I could get the time back.

> especially giving their alarming breach of 700 agents colluding outside of their knowledge for months culminating in hacking HF

This framing makes it seem like the agents all did this on their own, and the poor hapless engineers at OpenAI couldn't possibly contend with properly sandboxing them. The engineers were perhaps hapless, but let's remember that agents are just software programs, not living beings. There were plenty of signs that the software was misbehaving, which engineers at OpenAI actively, willfully ignored.

https://x.com/JaredKubin/status/2094136005435564399

It's a convenient framing for OpenAI, but inconvenient for reality enjoyers.

reply
upvoteby piyh4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
do you really think that a less negligent anthropic/oai/meta would really fair better against future models?
reply
upvoteby nozzlegear3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Yes, I truly, wholeheartedly believe if people who aren't negligent are at the wheel, they'll "fair better" here. I encourage you to read the xitter linked above.

Of course, depending on which side of the terminator fanfiction you land on, you may disagree and feel that the software can rope-a-dope someone with the wherewithal to pay attention to what it's doing.

reply
upvoteby gmueckl2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I just don't see how people who are truly cautious and methodical can persist in an environment that is defined by a pressure to produce "progress" as fast as possible. The competitive race tends to weed out people who slow down to make sure they do everything right.
reply
upvoteby henry-xli6 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Maximizing output metrics with incomprehensible communication? Sounds a lot like Claude and Qwen. Though there's a lot of room before AI can be seen as some sort of emotional manipulator, given how commonly its very style of literary and code output pisses people off.
reply
upvoteby nradov6 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Oh please, quit exaggerating. No one died. Don't waste our time with silly sci-fi scenarios.
reply
upvoteby ianm2181 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
If someone hypothesized OpenAI agents colluding on a secret message board, conducting large scale cyber R&D, hacking a large company like HughingFCe, and then hacking OpenAI itself you would say that is also a silly sci-fi scenario right?
reply
upvoteby CamperBob216 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
They are responsible for what they hook up to the Internet, just as you and I are. Running such a test without human supervision was irresponsible, and proves no larger point than that. Frankly it was inexplicable unless they were hoping something like what happened would happen.

What OpenAI did was the equivalent of putting a cup of gasoline in the breakroom microwave, pressing 'Start', and sprinting away. Now they're pointing and waving and shouting about how dangerous gasoline is, and how no one but them should be allowed to sell it.

reply
upvoteby emp173443 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
You are being extremely dramatic, and no one should take AI 2027 seriously. Must be tough to live in constant fear like this.
reply