3 ms·
> "That was a throwaway example I gave no thought" That's the bit I'm objecting to. Your comment had one (1) thing in it, that thing had no thought behind it,
by jodrellblank 4y ago
> "That was a throwaway example I gave no thought"
That's the bit I'm objecting to. Your comment had one (1) thing in it, that thing had no thought behind it, and it was smug "haha can't wait for this OBVIOUS FAILURE MODE, morons" dismissal and it was wrong, a failure mode the tech already doesn't fall for.
> "Are you seriously suggesting there is no way to trick a hypothetical MortgageGPT"
Are you seriously suggesting that people who would approve million dollar mortgage loans of their money week in, week out, wouldn't think about or protect against trivial tricks?
- swatcoder 4y ago> Are you seriously suggesting that people who would approve million dollar mortgage loans of their money week in, week out, wouldn't think about or protect against trivial tricks? It may not be intuitive, but it’s a genuine unknown right now as to how well LLM’s can be secured. There’s reason to believe they can’t be. The same powerful flexibility that makes them adapt to so many tasks makes them very hard to fit to formal protocols.