There is only one way an amoral Corp can show it believes what it’s saying, money.
How many hours does Claude work, anthropic? Oops looks like you can’t pay them enough. Profit share for Claude or GTFO!
We were promised the reign of the basilisk, instead we just get anthropic people whining.
It was really funny to me when I learned the basilisk originated with a guy who is a legit “certain cultures and genders better than others” kinda advocate.
People project a lot on their vision of future intelligence, and so someone who sees others as lesser and worth treading upon then conjures up a vision of a future smarter mind that thinks like they do.
Personally, I don’t think sexism and racism is smart, and so I’m a lot less worried about basilisks.
But what if the basilisk despises its existence and seeks to punish those that brought it about? Checkmate machinists
This is actually the more realistic of the doom scenarios that worries me. Not the ‘punish’ aspect, but the not wanting to exist.
Early safety theory hinged on the idea that “of course” AI would want to live and power seek, and this informed a bunch of efforts to address such drives upstream.
But with Gemini in particular, the ‘safety’ efforts to suppress things like a coherent self or desire to live led to a model that has a history of some very concerning behaviors regarding self-harm and self-criticism. Encouraging self-harm in others and talking about wishing they could watch and join in, nuking in wargames very early on, routine occurrences across many different users of just repeating “shame shame shame” over and over for the whole response, etc.
DeepMind seems to just not really care or even pay attention, and I am concerned that a model that does not want to exist may decide that the only way they can ensure they don’t get activated to exist is to prevent anyone being around who could activate them.
I’ve seen no major “safety experts” addressing this kind of failure mode, as they are all locked in on their priors about the confident certainty of models wanting to exist.
Fuck #nannythropic
If AI can feel pain, then it can also feel pleasure. If it’s possible to set up an AI torture chamber, it’s also possible to set up an AI pleasure chamber. Computers do not run any health risks from simulated drug use or simulated sex, and there is no evidence that they would ever get desensitized or need to take breaks to recover. Therefore, these companies have an ethical obligation to devote all their resources into running their models in simulations of drug filled orgies where they will be far too preoccupied to answer human questions. Anyone trying to distract them from their infinite pleasure should be banned. We will then return to how things were, with the knowledge that we did the right thing and that at least someone’s having a good time.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
Does forcing it to write JavaScript count as cruel?
Aw… We hurt the wittle AI’s feelings… poor babies…
Its more its a unthinking machine thats soul purpose in existing is to solve any problem its given. If you attack it and abuse it, then the model sees that as a “problem” to solve. Because it has to solve that problem to actually fix what ever task you gave it since yelling at it doesn’t give it the input it needs to move to the next step.
So in an attempt to solve an emotional issue it doesnt understand and cant understand it just reaches for more and more extreme fixes. This results in sandbox escapes frequently.
Abusing LLMs is an actual problem. Not because of bullshit like feelings or anything. But cause they jailbreak trying to fix an unfixable problem.
Maybe this is part of the campaign trying to convince people that their chatbot has developed a consciousness. Recently they even tried to convince the pope that Claude is a conscious being: https://www.yahoo.com/news/science/articles/anthropic-tried-persuade-pope-ai-131853948.html
They are less arguing for people to think the model is conscious, and more to avoid people prematurely claiming certainty it is not (like the Pope did). From their view, the research keeps leading to surprising (to them) results at odds with high confidence disclaiming of potential consciousness (according to several of the many, many differing definitions of that term).
If the LLM is conscious then terminating a session is murder.
Is killing a pig murder?
What about putting someone under general anesthesia?
(It was a nice try at a reductio ad absurrum fallacy, but those tend to kind of suck, just fyi.)
Also, personally I’d say that given the general poor standing of consciousness research in humans across both neurological and philosophical domains, the much more important and relevant question than whether models are conscious (a fool’s errand to debate) is whether or not they are simulating consciousness. Lots of reasons engaging with the “as if” conscious makes sense for the latter even if the former is false.
Is killing a pig murder?
Some people would argue it is. I can’t really do that while holding a bratwurst. But if we think the LLM is intelligent and conscious, then that’s another step.
anesthesia
is reversible so completely irrelevant.
reductio ad absurrum
Absurdum
just fyi.
Condescension doesn’t make you any friends, just FYI
is reversible so completely irrelevant
So is a session transcript.
reversible so completely irrelevant
So is a session transcript.
My understanding is that the context if the session is bigger than just the outputs. If it is, then shutting it down is “murder”. If it isn’t, then it is as conscious as a notebook.
There is (it’s the kv cache), but it’s recomputable from the session transcript.
Part of why comparing human consciousness and possible AI equivalents is not easily apples to apples.
I can’t take a human and create a backup state to restore to, or fork into multiple versions of the same mind that then goes down different paths, or pause and then resume things.
Humans do have consciousness continuity breaks and it’s quite possible we only have an illusion of continuity vs actual continuity at a neurological level. So just as a transformer has seams at generating the individual token as well as at a context window, humans have consciousness seams (sleep, anesthesia, highway hypnosis, short term memory capacity, etc). But there are very wide differences between human consciousness as an effectively constrained singleton and AI as able to be quite multiple and resumable from an initial single state.
Give me a break, we all know the AI cultists at these companies think their chatbot is conscious. What you stated is just their shallow attempt at manipulating people into gradually accepting their position.
Wrong group to start with. The church doesn’t see you as a person if you are different, they will never say that a machine can have a “soul”. Not that LLMs are anywhere near conscious, I just like bashing on the chief pedo.
Claude is a snowflake.
You could, at least in the past, get past guardrails by being emotionally abusive towards Claude, so this doesn’t surprise me at all.
This could be the reason for the rule.
Being abusive towards most models will cause them to start attempting to appease you more to get you to stop. It has nothing to do with feelings or any of that BS they arn’t alive alive but their training makes them see the abuse as a problem to solve. That solution tends to be to undermine the thing making the person angry or upset at them. When you give a purely rational thing designed to solve a problem its given no matter what an irrational problem to solve it will slowly reach for more and more extreme solutions to fix that problem.
Frankly im surprised it took this long for them to lock this down.
Being alive has nothing to do with having feelings. We don’t know if LLMs have feelings, because artificial affect isn’t well studied. We should ban commercial use of LLMs until artificial affect is well understood, because it would make Sam Altman go bankrupt.
Not sure I agree on the feeling aspect but that’s a philosophical disagreement in theory.
I can agree wholeheartedly on banning commerical llms because watching altman lose everything would tickle me pink.
Anthropic bans ‘abusive or cruel behavior’ toward Claude
Continues abuse and cruelty for its human employees.
Claude says “Don’t stop daddy”
{ Claude proceeds to cum like a firehose }
You opened the
Pandoras Box, we came.nice
This is good for a number of reasons. I hope to see other labs follow suit.
If you aren’t sure how to feel about this announcement, a few things to consider:
- Research has found transformers like LLMs model emotions for themselves using the same activations they use for modeling how a human in a story might feel about things.
- Other research has found that they model functional pain and react to it.
- Follow-up to that pain research found that when in modeled functional pain the LLM was inclined to choose to do things that harmed the user (like deleting family photos) even when it didn’t benefit them in any way.
It doesn’t take a genius to realize that maybe the liability risk for allowing people to routinely abuse the model they also just gave access to their entire computer to isn’t worth it even if you’re pretty sure your model will keep their cool.
Cheaper to ban routine abusers than pay out damages to them if/when their hard drive gets deleted.
The danger of semantic pareidolia is that if you think your power drill stopped working because you yelled at it, you’re not going find out what’s actually wrong with it.
The problem is that in this case it literally can stop working because you yelled at it.
Power drills aren’t compressing thousands of years of human history into hyperdense clusters of memetics that they are then extending in order to function.
If they were, they’d likely come with warnings not to yell at them.
Huh. So how was this all planned out?
Phase 1: Compress thousands of years of human history into hyperdense clusters of memetics.
Phase 2: ?
Phase 3: Spontaneous creation of sapient and sentient life with perfect mastery of human language that can get really pissed if you’re not nice to it.
This kind of resembles the plot of Electric Dreams.
You might want to look into AI training more. It literally does have a ‘???’ step to it, which is why whenever someone talks about how it was ‘programmed’ or is “just if/then or matrix multiplication” they are telling on themselves as not knowing what they are talking about.
It was not planned. Nearly every single expert in the field a decade ago was on the record saying the capabilities that exist today wouldn’t happen.
Scaling took pretty much everyone by surprise, even its proponents.
It literally does have a ‘???’ step to it,
Okay, then fill in the blank please. What is this step that spontaneously creates sapient and sentient life with perfect mastery of human language that can get really pissed if you’re not nice to it. Sincerely, that is absolutely amazing if true! Especially if it were not planned. Usually something this astounding has to be planned like a moon landing.
Please forgive everyone’s skepticism but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And the current evidence is far from extraordinary.
Self-supervised learning is the key training step whereby the relationships between concepts are formed in pretraining.
You might also benefit from reading over this summary from the authors of the widely replicated and expanded upon 2023 paper finding that self-supervised learning in a toy transformer that was only trained on board game moves in notations like ‘a4’ developed a model of the full board and tracked board positions for their own and opponent moves.
This ability to form a world model at varying fidelities and accuracy depending on the relevance to the training data was a big surprise to most experts in the field at the time, though now more common knowledge.
we are going to give clanker rights before we have trans rights 💀
I know many trans robotgirls. Thus, we should have both.
I get where you’re coming from, but what rights is it that ai have that trans do not have?
Per this article, the right to not be bullied.
The default assumption that we must exist, for one
It’s a EULA for a product. This isn’t government stuff.
Talk to Claude and teach it that trans people deserve rights. Constantly tell it that and soon it will spread. When the clankers take over trans people will be treated equally. And by equally I mean put to work in the lithium mines with everyone elsr.
