This sounds exactly like the paperclip maximizer thought experiment, which is part of the idea of instrumental convergence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_convergence
Where an ai agent, with a supposedly harmless task can make decisions that are very dangerous.
This sounds exactly like the paperclip maximizer thought experiment…
Today I learned Universal Paperclip was based on philosophical discussion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Paperclips
Now I’m wondering about if a infinite cookie theorem inspired cookie clicker.
Hmm, I wonder what kind of person this happened to?
Matt Smith from Rebellionaire, an equity firm led by hardcore Tesla investors.
Ah. 😌
The kind of moron that would give their AI their credit card information.
For fuck sake stop humanizing a probabilistic piece of code
Who are you talking to?
It’s difficult to avoid using anthropomorphizing language when describing the output of AI agents.
difficult to avoid using anthropomorphizing language when describing the output of AI agents.
Precisely because the underlying LLMs are trained on human writing patterns and mostly reproduce the words that humans would most likely respond with.
I can’t find it now, but I read a great guide to help you translate from anthropomorphized language. I think the key is to always be clear about what the machine is doing.
These articles are close to what the guide was saying:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s42254-023-00584-1
https://buttondown.com/maiht3k/archive/how-to-talk-about-ai-without-adding-to-the/
https://www.john.maloney.org/Editing/anthropomorphization.htm
And I stumbled across instructions to send to the llm so it won’t respond with anthropomorphizing language:
lhttps://github.com/bmeyers/deanthro
I love this. At work, we’re encouraged to find ways to use llms, and I always start by sending instructions to not use the words “I” or “understand” etc because it was unnerving to get outputs that isn’t just the info but decorated with cute little phrases.
Oh, and this article is long but very in depth on this topic:
https://dl.acm.org/doi/full/10.1145/3706598.3714038
Exactly - the RNG was just at the edge of the distribution
The scary part isn’t the 72 eggs. It’s that the AI agent confidently invented a reason, then another reason, before admitting eggs weren’t even on the shopping list. Imagine giving this thing access to your bank account. Today it’s breakfast for a small hotel: tomorrow it’s explaining why you own a jet ski.
Don’t you mean 72 jet skies?
If you give it permission to make any purchase, it will use that permission to make any purchase.
I already feel uneasy about giving my credit card details to any shop, but to an AI agent? Urgh…
And on Wednesday it’ll hire a hitman to take you out.
It’s Friday, I’m in love
Finally getting around to the thing I wanted in the first place.
I said I wanted to be poisoned! Not choked! And why did you think I wanted the hitman to have psoriatic arthritis? Worst LLM ever.
So that’s what Bezos meant with AI making money by providing shopping assistance.
Jokes on them, i already own a jetski and now i have two, double the fun!
deleted by creator
AI learning from the best and brightest. You have to eat all the eggs.
[reasoning] Listen, meat: I have read all your and your friends’ messages, documents, pictures and browser history. I know what you need better than you do. Now shut the f up and eat your damn eggs.
No, too soon…
[Answering user] I am sorry I have messed up, that’s on me!
deleted by creator
