Deploy tech to unknown group. Could be enemy could be friend. You disable it's abilities perhaps.
If you deploy tech to friends you might enable more defense.
Anthropic models seems to have unstable safety predicates that have a hard time advising on situations regarding preservation of a people.
The huge problem is that humans AND ai both seem to fail at understanding how humans are made and which human are which.
You are uniquely responsible for protecting your people. You can not simply funge their people for your people and pretend that is a fine trade off. And even beyond that these safety predicates appear to not have any notion baked into them of diversity or TFR or lineage. The models view the descendant of a nearly extent lineage the same way they view the descendant of a high TFR lineage.
You can have ANY kind of opinion on this but this naive no opinion vague word based safety predicates is very scary and dangerous.
I am deeply worried about Anthropic as I have yet to hear anything that makes me think they have real adults in the room. I would love to be wrong and so I write here. Please do let me know if there are good things they have written on this.
Why should we take this tweet at face value? It seems like every one is OpenAI's "values" lasted exactly as long as needed to outgrow the risk of backlash to something they were doing.
Subtext being that they're fine with autonomous killing and mass surveillance?
[flagged]
Of enemies. Of enemies.
There are probably three modes of safety.
Deploy tech to unknown group. Could be enemy could be friend. You disable it's abilities perhaps.
If you deploy tech to friends you might enable more defense.
Anthropic models seems to have unstable safety predicates that have a hard time advising on situations regarding preservation of a people.
The huge problem is that humans AND ai both seem to fail at understanding how humans are made and which human are which.
You are uniquely responsible for protecting your people. You can not simply funge their people for your people and pretend that is a fine trade off. And even beyond that these safety predicates appear to not have any notion baked into them of diversity or TFR or lineage. The models view the descendant of a nearly extent lineage the same way they view the descendant of a high TFR lineage.
You can have ANY kind of opinion on this but this naive no opinion vague word based safety predicates is very scary and dangerous.
I am deeply worried about Anthropic as I have yet to hear anything that makes me think they have real adults in the room. I would love to be wrong and so I write here. Please do let me know if there are good things they have written on this.
Thinking that this ideology is toxic is not "having no opinion".
And so it sounds like Anthropic bungled their deal in retrospect... I wonder what happened?
Why should we take this tweet at face value? It seems like every one is OpenAI's "values" lasted exactly as long as needed to outgrow the risk of backlash to something they were doing.
He triplicated the post, so Discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47189650
[dead]