7 ms·

It's so disappointing that we have non-human agents that we can interact with now but we actually have to be more restrained than we do with normal people, up t

by rdlw 2y ago

It's so disappointing that we have non-human agents that we can interact with now but we actually have to be more restrained than we do with normal people, up to and including random hangups that corporations have decided are bad, like mentioning anything remotely sexual. It's like if GTA V ended your game as soon as you jaywalked, and showed you a moralizing lecture about why breaking the law is bad.

NemoNobody 2y ago
This exactly. I stumbled on an filed Policing Patent regarding a streamlined, real time national AI system that will determine "quasi-instantaneously" if ANY queried person is a likely suspect or not a likely suspect - they state multiple times its for terrorists but in actual examples shown in the patent they near exclusively talk about drug dealers and users, primarily regarding the seizure of their assets That's part of the AI "suspect/not" system, the determination of the likelihood that there is seizable assets or not is another way to state the patent - all under guise of officer security and safety, obviously. The only immediate feedback provided upon conclusion of a scenario where an Officer was notified that suspect is "known offender/law breaker" - that system quite literally incorporates officer opinion statements, treated as jury decided fact. " I saw him smoke weed" is legitimate qualifier for an immediate harassment experience where the officer is highly motivated to make an arrest . ALL reported feedback upon completion of the event from AI to Officer to Prosecution was related to the assets having been successfully collected, or not. It also had tons of language regarding AI/automated prosecution offices. It also seems rather rudimentary - like it's going to cause a lot of real serious issues being so basic but that's by design to provide "actionable feedback" - it presents an either or of every situation for the officer to go off. That's the Sith btw - if that sounds familiar it's bc it's exactly what the bad guys do that the good guys are not supposed to ever do - see the world in black or white, right or wrong, most everything is shades of grey. So, that's not only wrong it's also a little stupid... and apparently how cops are supposed to defacto operate without thought.
falcor84 2y ago
>It's like if GTA V ended your game as soon as you jaywalked, and showed you a moralizing lecture about why breaking the law is bad. Advocating for the (anti-)devil, if I were an NPC in GTA, I would be absolutely grateful for that.
- munk-a 2y ago
  Thankfully you're not - thankfully we're all not NPCs in Counter Strike or Minecraft or any other game with a hint of possible violence in it. "Doing a GTA irl" is absolutely repulsive - so we've got video games which are there for entertainment. We can just sidestep the debate about whether violence in video games makes violence in real life more likely because that debate has been thoroughly covered in other venues but part of GTA being fun is that it doesn't involve real people. Most of us would be horrified in a real life GTA scenario both from the damage we were causing to others and the fact that we were capable of doing that damage - but NPCs aren't real.
  - falcor84 2y ago
    I was making an analogy - I am an "NPC" in the real world and I am somewhat concerned about people abusing very powerful LLMs to cause me harm. As another example, I was very distraught with what the internet did to Microsoft's Tay, and while I'm not 100% happy with OpenAI's approach to safety, I feel much safer with it than without it.
    - vsuperpower2021 2y ago
      [dead]
    - christianqchung 2y ago
      What're they gonna do to harm you with "very powerful" models? Are you with especially gullible or vulnerable to explicit spam? Or are you suggestible to methods of violence that once seen, will make you more likely to carry them out? Because if not, they can't hurt you, only the reputation of the company.
      - falcor84 2y ago
        Well, yes, I am somewhat gullible, and vulnerable to spam and phishing attacks myself. But moreso, I live in a society with some people more gullible than me, and I'm vulnerable to be attacked by them acting on concerted misinformation. In particular, I'm very concerned about future technology making it easier to mislead people into violence like in the case of the Pizzagate attack by Edgar Welch [0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory#Criminal_responses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory#Cr...
csallen 2y ago
GTA V is a sandboxed game, the purpose of which is to largely to wreak havoc in a virtual world where nothing can go wrong. LLMs are a powerful and little-understood real-world tool that the public has been given access to en masse. Tools which powerful and credible people have consistently warned have the ability to cause massive harm. And tools whose creators face intense scrutiny up to and including existential legal and PR threats, because (for better or for worse) the public holds them accountable for any stupid things people do with them. I also find it disappointing that everything is so neutered, but it's hard to see this having gone any other way. Especially given how imprecise and difficult to train LLMs are.
- munk-a 2y ago
  LLMs are absolutely a sandbox that can be cleared and purged at will with even less investment into the setup of individual tools. I am having a hard time understanding what distinction you're drawing and, if anything, I'd expect GTA to be more restrictive because someone had to be paid to program all of the possible outcomes explicitly.
  - superb_dev 2y ago
    > LLMs are absolutely a sandbox that can be cleared and purged at will This just clearly isn't true. You cannot clear and purge the output of an LLM from the entire world. Once it produces some text, it also looses control of said text. The human using the AI can take that text anywhere and do anything they want with it.
    - immibis 2y ago
      What, exactly, are you worried about the LLM producing? Effective, undetectable spam? That cat's out of that bag. How does forcing it to never mention sex make the world safer at all?
      - superb_dev 2y ago
        Cheaper and bigger misinformation campaigns on social media is what I'm most worried about, but that's not what my comment was about. LLM are not a sandbox and absolutely do have an impact on the world outside. "How does forcing it to never mention sex make the world safer at all?" That's not happening. ChatGPT will talk about sex, and as proof I just asked it what sex was and it happily responded.
salamo 2y ago
> It's like if GTA V ended your game as soon as you jaywalked, and showed you a moralizing lecture about why breaking the law is bad. There was a game called Driving in Tehran which was exactly that. If you speed or crash, you get fined. If you hit someone, it tells you "don't play games with people's lives" and then exits entirely. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFDYvlm7geU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFDYvlm7geU
Grimblewald 2y ago
but also consider how dicey public perception of these models is currently. It is precariously close to outright and emphatic rejection.
- NemoNobody 2y ago
  Haha, yeah ok. The masses have already nerfed our collective access to the true abilities of this, barely surface scratched tool that we just created - all that bitching about copyright by the 3 effected people, all likely eat just fine but their "offense" to something they didn't kno happened til they looked into it for possible payout - maybe even they got paid, I don't kno I kno that the AIs broke shortly after - then the "offense" to the essentially rule 34 type shit - People used AI to make T Swift nude!! How could they - said no one. All that type stuff will happen and we may lose access. Microsoft is never going back. Google is never going back. Amazon, X/Tesla, Facebook... do you understand? Do you think their developers deal with a broken AI?? Haha, nah - there are reason some of the less clued in staff think their AIs are "awake" - I. house AI at Microsoft is many years ahead of copilot in its current and likely near foreseeable future state. To be clear, the time to stop this has passed, we can still opt to reflect it but it will never go away.

by rdlw 2y ago

NemoNobody 2y ago

This exactly. I stumbled on an filed Policing Patent regarding a streamlined, real time national AI system that will determine "quasi-instantaneously" if ANY queried person is a likely suspect or not a likely suspect - they state multiple times its for terrorists but in actual examples shown in the patent they near exclusively talk about drug dealers and users, primarily regarding the seizure of their assets That's part of the AI "suspect/not" system, the determination of the likelihood that there is seizable assets or not is another way to state the patent - all under guise of officer security and safety, obviously. The only immediate feedback provided upon conclusion of a scenario where an Officer was notified that suspect is "known offender/law breaker" - that system quite literally incorporates officer opinion statements, treated as jury decided fact. " I saw him smoke weed" is legitimate qualifier for an immediate harassment experience where the officer is highly motivated to make an arrest . ALL reported feedback upon completion of the event from AI to Officer to Prosecution was related to the assets having been successfully collected, or not. It also had tons of language regarding AI/automated prosecution offices. It also seems rather rudimentary - like it's going to cause a lot of real serious issues being so basic but that's by design to provide "actionable feedback" - it presents an either or of every situation for the officer to go off. That's the Sith btw - if that sounds familiar it's bc it's exactly what the bad guys do that the good guys are not supposed to ever do - see the world in black or white, right or wrong, most everything is shades of grey. So, that's not only wrong it's also a little stupid... and apparently how cops are supposed to defacto operate without thought.

falcor84 2y ago

>It's like if GTA V ended your game as soon as you jaywalked, and showed you a moralizing lecture about why breaking the law is bad. Advocating for the (anti-)devil, if I were an NPC in GTA, I would be absolutely grateful for that.

munk-a 2y ago
Thankfully you're not - thankfully we're all not NPCs in Counter Strike or Minecraft or any other game with a hint of possible violence in it. "Doing a GTA irl" is absolutely repulsive - so we've got video games which are there for entertainment. We can just sidestep the debate about whether violence in video games makes violence in real life more likely because that debate has been thoroughly covered in other venues but part of GTA being fun is that it doesn't involve real people. Most of us would be horrified in a real life GTA scenario both from the damage we were causing to others and the fact that we were capable of doing that damage - but NPCs aren't real.
- falcor84 2y ago
  I was making an analogy - I am an "NPC" in the real world and I am somewhat concerned about people abusing very powerful LLMs to cause me harm. As another example, I was very distraught with what the internet did to Microsoft's Tay, and while I'm not 100% happy with OpenAI's approach to safety, I feel much safer with it than without it.
  - vsuperpower2021 2y ago
    [dead]
  - christianqchung 2y ago
    What're they gonna do to harm you with "very powerful" models? Are you with especially gullible or vulnerable to explicit spam? Or are you suggestible to methods of violence that once seen, will make you more likely to carry them out? Because if not, they can't hurt you, only the reputation of the company.
    - falcor84 2y ago
      Well, yes, I am somewhat gullible, and vulnerable to spam and phishing attacks myself. But moreso, I live in a society with some people more gullible than me, and I'm vulnerable to be attacked by them acting on concerted misinformation. In particular, I'm very concerned about future technology making it easier to mislead people into violence like in the case of the Pizzagate attack by Edgar Welch [0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory#Criminal_responses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory#Cr...

csallen 2y ago

GTA V is a sandboxed game, the purpose of which is to largely to wreak havoc in a virtual world where nothing can go wrong. LLMs are a powerful and little-understood real-world tool that the public has been given access to en masse. Tools which powerful and credible people have consistently warned have the ability to cause massive harm. And tools whose creators face intense scrutiny up to and including existential legal and PR threats, because (for better or for worse) the public holds them accountable for any stupid things people do with them. I also find it disappointing that everything is so neutered, but it's hard to see this having gone any other way. Especially given how imprecise and difficult to train LLMs are.

munk-a 2y ago
LLMs are absolutely a sandbox that can be cleared and purged at will with even less investment into the setup of individual tools. I am having a hard time understanding what distinction you're drawing and, if anything, I'd expect GTA to be more restrictive because someone had to be paid to program all of the possible outcomes explicitly.
- superb_dev 2y ago
  > LLMs are absolutely a sandbox that can be cleared and purged at will This just clearly isn't true. You cannot clear and purge the output of an LLM from the entire world. Once it produces some text, it also looses control of said text. The human using the AI can take that text anywhere and do anything they want with it.
  - immibis 2y ago
    What, exactly, are you worried about the LLM producing? Effective, undetectable spam? That cat's out of that bag. How does forcing it to never mention sex make the world safer at all?
    - superb_dev 2y ago
      Cheaper and bigger misinformation campaigns on social media is what I'm most worried about, but that's not what my comment was about. LLM are not a sandbox and absolutely do have an impact on the world outside. "How does forcing it to never mention sex make the world safer at all?" That's not happening. ChatGPT will talk about sex, and as proof I just asked it what sex was and it happily responded.

salamo 2y ago

> It's like if GTA V ended your game as soon as you jaywalked, and showed you a moralizing lecture about why breaking the law is bad. There was a game called Driving in Tehran which was exactly that. If you speed or crash, you get fined. If you hit someone, it tells you "don't play games with people's lives" and then exits entirely. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFDYvlm7geU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFDYvlm7geU

Grimblewald 2y ago

but also consider how dicey public perception of these models is currently. It is precariously close to outright and emphatic rejection.

NemoNobody 2y ago
Haha, yeah ok. The masses have already nerfed our collective access to the true abilities of this, barely surface scratched tool that we just created - all that bitching about copyright by the 3 effected people, all likely eat just fine but their "offense" to something they didn't kno happened til they looked into it for possible payout - maybe even they got paid, I don't kno I kno that the AIs broke shortly after - then the "offense" to the essentially rule 34 type shit - People used AI to make T Swift nude!! How could they - said no one. All that type stuff will happen and we may lose access. Microsoft is never going back. Google is never going back. Amazon, X/Tesla, Facebook... do you understand? Do you think their developers deal with a broken AI?? Haha, nah - there are reason some of the less clued in staff think their AIs are "awake" - I. house AI at Microsoft is many years ahead of copilot in its current and likely near foreseeable future state. To be clear, the time to stop this has passed, we can still opt to reflect it but it will never go away.