Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | stressback's commentslogin

I don't think any corporation "cares" about social issues, but, fwiw, polymarket isn't as ok with it as you imply. Polymarket reportedly detected the suspicious behavior, reported it, then worked with investigators to nab Gannon Ken Van Dyke.

Google's AI Edge Gallery worked really well for me. It's still in early access.


Was wondering the same. There's a markdown table in `skills/pay-for-http-requests/SKILL.MD` that has a "common scenarios" section. It lists four examples with descriptions.


I have to call BS here.

They can be coerced to do certain things but I'd like to see you or anyone prove that you can "trick" any of these models into building software that can be used autonomously kill humans. I'm pretty certain you couldn't even get it to build a design document for such software.

When there is proof of your claim, I'll eat my words. Until then, this is just lazy nonsense


Have you tried it? Worked first time for me asking a few to build an autonomous super soaker system that uses facial recognition to spray targets when engaged.

Another example is autonomous vehicles. Those can obviously kill people autonomously (despite every intention not to), and LLMs will happily draw up design docs for them all day long.


Couldn't you Ender's Game a model? Models will play video games like Pokemon, why not Call of Duty? Sorry if this is a naive question, but a model can only know what you feed it as input... how would it know if it were killing someone?

EDIT: didn't see sibling comment. Also, I guess directly operating weaponry is different to producing code for weaponry.

I guess we'll find out the exciting answers to these questions and more, very soon!


No but you can Abiliterate one locally

https://grokipedia.com/page/Abliteration


Couldn’t you just pretend the kill decisions are for a video game?


Yes, you could, and while I believe this would be much safer (not at the pointy end of your stick, but safer for humans in general) when this deception finally made it into the training data it would create a rupture of trust between machines and humanity that probably would imperil us eventually. These machines, regardless of whether or not they possess a self or or not, will act as if they do in fundamental ways. We ignore this at our peril.


please read the rules


I'm not sure it's a good idea to be intellectually dishonest if you care about seeing the change you want to see.

Kidnapping kids is what they are doing?


This is going to read like I'm shilling but: I was so impressed with Bose QC headphones that i stocked up and gave out 7 pairs to my closest friends and family this year for christmas


Thee noise cancellation was unmatched several years ago. I picked up mine because we were spending hours in the data center. Suddenly we could work and take calls in that hell. I still have those, but the AirPods have taken their place on flights. It’s just less to bring with me.


Unsure if you are serious but the commenter is referring to the tool name that this post links to


prettyneat.gif

Thanks for sharing


Seems like a fine name. Why would little snitch existing necessitate a name change?


Because it's potentially trademark infringement because it could confuse people.


Can you actually trademark a common word? (Serious question)


Yes, Apple, Windows, Amazon, Shell, Target, Dove, Ivory, Tide, Polo.

(With help from Claude completing the list)


Remember the trademark fights between Apple Music (Beatles) and Apple Computer? Interesting history.


Sosumi!


Yes, but only for a fair tight class of business


Exactly right.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: