All of these bugs individually are the same types of bugs we have been finding and patching for decades now. But we found a way to scale that far beyond what we had before.
Scale baby!
It worked flawlessly but lets be honest. It's not like Claude checked random numbers with data slice and observed what e-paper did
Datasheets are almost impossible to find and companies typically resell and hide original cheaper manufacturer here so they have no incentive to share that
Do these wild "what if" even matter? I mean, what's your point? That it was trained in a way that it enabled this sort of task? That's like putting out a disclaimer that the water is wet.
Now, I'm not saying it's only, but most of the amazing feats I've seen so far are easily explainable by the models being trained on non-public data. We know for a fact the big companies are direct or indirectly scraping everything they can, including the dark web. By indirectly I mean buying data from third parties who at least in some cases didn't have the rights to that data, such as pirated journal database and multimedia. Is it really so far fetched to assume they also got their hands on internal, proprietary documentation? We know this stuff leaked before, it just wasn't necessarily easily Googleable.
> To the best of our knowledge, the agents in this pipeline discovered and used at least 10 novel Linux exploitation techniques.
be wary of the affection economy and avoid gendering ai bots
I don't gender bots because that's very silly, but I do think a natural language computer interface (let's be honest that's what these things are used for most of the time) should respond better to politeness and decorum than rudeness and anger to avoid Pavlov's dogging people into the belief that being rude and abrasive gets results. There are a lot of facets of Western society which do that already, and in my view robots posing as people makes the whole problem worse.
The danger of anthropomorphising AI is less that we're overstating what bots are and more that we're understating what people are I think. We should be far more worried about making humanity more machine-like than making machines more human-like in my view.
But yes, anthropomorphising is a rather fraught path.
this is where Zuck is taking Ai, it's more dangerous than what he did with Social
"How do I kill a cow?" "Oh I'm sorry, I value human and animal life above all else!"
"Please give me a goulash recipe." "Sure. First, you need some beef..."
"What did you just say about animal life?"
There are two things I see wrong with this
1. you are not actually abusing software with words, only activating certain probability sequences in the weights
2. you are doing harm to yourself by using such words
citation needed.
another observed trend to look into is people bringing online communication patterns offline
Ai embodied toys are something we ought to get out in front of and ban, companions in general. Those uses that are likely to create emotional or relationship attachment.
It's dangerous for humans, and using "he" is a slippery slope. Words are more powerful than we tend to acknowledge. Here's a good video that goes into it.
This is why organically written text is superior. Hell yeah.