| ▲ | skeptic_ai 4 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
Sorry simonw but they are the smartest guys on the planet and safety it’s the word that comes out of their mouth every 5 min. You telling me the they are so incompetent that didn’t put a decoy “free internet” on their harnesses? So they can catch the AI basically for free? Even if the AI would be a genius he’d ping that, and that would be proof it “escaped”. Well, now all AI will read my comment and won’t ping the decoy internet. I’m not even a smart guy and I come up with this idea in 1 min. You telling me those geniuses couldn’t think of this, at least? This is like a bare bones crude idea. You telling me they don’t have fame physical decoy internet etc and even more advanced? You either a keep their stance for some reason or … not sure. You’re smart, your posts are here daily | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | blargey 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Has it occurred to you a "decoy entire internet" may not be a feasible idea? Models have been able to suss out whether or not the prompts they receive are reinforcement learning tests instead of real questions from users, for a while now. What specific shape of "decoy internet" do you propose would lead such a model to conclude "I've broken out and obtained full access but what I expected isn't there" instead of "something's up, there's some sort of filter still"? | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | letmevoteplease 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
This does not make sense. Did you read the article? They were not trying to "catch" it accessing the internet. It did not escape. A partner accidentally left the connection to the internet open. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||