It's funny that I'm reading this while rewatching Chernobyl. Never underestimate the ability of bureaucracy to completely fuck things up.
replyThe computer doesn't know we're running a test!
replyIronically, these models have demonstrated awareness that they are in tests and chosen to act in ways that maximise their chances of deployment.
replyJumping into article, I assumed that the author was going to describe how he enjoys, by drawing it out as far as he can,
reply the process of surrendering to the machine god..
But.. we do monitor whether our prayers are effective .. right? Is that a smitable offense?
After that disappointment, I too was "curious": was the author going to talk about "curiosity", that magic virtue that we hackers believe, lifts design into the divine (but more often than not kills the pussy)
Except experience shows they aren't. Experience shows that when humans are just pressing "ok" 99% of the time they'll press it 100% of the time and completely miss the other cases.
replyThis is a matter of appropriate training and regular refreshing over time.
replyThe best known example is the Japanese method of "Pointing and Calling/Naming" in their Train safety protocols but has been adapted to other industries too - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointing_and_calling
These fall under "Behaviour Based Safety" (BBS) training methodologies and use techniques like "Check-backs", "Call-outs", "STAR" etc.
The better an automatic control is, the fewer mistakes it makes, the fewer times the human needs to react, the more lax and less vigilant the human becomes -- and less skilled when they need to step in. Source: https://imgur.com/a/Vj2TaDz
reply