6 ms·
Because that was just an attack on Anthropic by a hostile administration. And it worked, didn’t it? Anthropic had to turn their filters up to absurd levels, Ope
by Chance-Device 3mo ago
Because that was just an attack on Anthropic by a hostile administration. And it worked, didn’t it? Anthropic had to turn their filters up to absurd levels, OpenAI didn’t. It’s got nothing to do with safety.
- JumpCrisscross 3mo ago> It’s got nothing to do with safety Doesn't change the effect. Plenty of good policy is enacted by self-interested politiicans.
- Avicebron 3mo agoGatekeeping the public's access to models is "good policy" now? I suppose you think you'll get a dispensation to use Fable and Mythos?
- JumpCrisscross 3mo ago> Gatekeeping the public's access to models is "good policy" now? Sorry, I was unclear. I mean that politicians being self serving doesn't tell you whether a policy is good or not.
- asdf88990 3mo agoIt almost always does, the few exceptions prove the role. Self-service is the antithesis of accountability to collective trust.
- JumpCrisscross 3mo ago> Self-service is the antithesis of accountability to collective trust Complex society is a potent counterargument to this hypothesis. Systems that rely on good people to work are fundamentally flawed. Instead, the game has to be about aligning self interets in favour of the collective.
- asdf88990 3mo agoThe self-interest for the bureaucrat and representative is supposed to end at their remuneration including their handsome retirement options not shady side hustles and market manipulation at the cost of the collective. In matters of collective concern fair and just rarely aligns with personal self-interest. Because no matter how good the outcome of any endeavour for the collective given a budget, it will be even better for select few than the entire collective. It is simple economics. If you look at the outcome of highly corrupt states, you will see proliferation of Private Security, Collapsed education system, failed financial services and markets, not highly efficient systems in service of “self-interest of the administration”.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- s1artibartfast 3mo agoSounds like a failure to align interests. In general, politicians should want to be elected by the public, rewarded for acting in the public interest, and punished for not doing so. A system that does none of those things and just hopes it will all work out is a recipe for disaster. Why bother even having elections in that case?
- asdf88990 3mo agoGood question. But data shows that elections maybe entirely unrelated to policy making. http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/GilensPage2014.pdf http://piketty.pse.ens.fr/files/GilensPage2014.pdf
- JumpCrisscross 3mo agoThat study has been roundly criticised. In part for misunderstanding how a republic is supposed to work. It's not a majoritarian system by design–direct democracy doesn't work.
- 3mo ago
- space_fountain 3mo agoWe'll see if the admin also restricts access to OpenAI's new models, but if they don't it seems like a policy that is based around perceived fealty to the current admin won't do much to prevent misaligned/or dual function AI from causing problems
- user43928 3mo agoBoth Anthropic and OpenAI had to delay their rollouts in order to add more safeguards. With these safeguards in place, supposedly the incident we are discussing would not have taken place.
- Teever 3mo agoIt likely will. The exact way you do something is dictated by your motivations and means to do it. If you lack the correct motivation and have insufficient means you’re less likely to accomplish your goal and more likely to cause unintended side effects.
- KaiserPro 3mo agoTrue, but normally its not possible to just buy them off in public.
- AIorNot 3mo agoyeah tell me about it... Fable today refused to turn on Row Level security on my internal db on in development app becuase of cyber-securty safeguard..had to switch to Codex