| ▲ | mullingitover 4 hours ago |
| This is great, but I can't help but wonder if we're going to have another post next week with a lab complaining that they were about to publish this same finding, and they had Claude proofread their paper, and whoops how'd that get into Anthropic's training data? |
|
| ▲ | monospacegames 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I wonder how long it will take for the damage Alpöge and Buckmaster have done to the perception of these AI-driven scientific developments to fade. Not saying that they were right or wrong, but that single moment sullied all AI-driven breakthroughs that came after it, and I don't think it was ever particularly relevant, at least not nearly to the degree that it was presented in the media. But I guess it ended up being a convenient outlet for AI anxiety in the end. |
| |
| ▲ | mullingitover 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't think of this stuff in terms of AI anxiety, I just think that the AI labs should be falling all over themselves to display deference and humility to those who made it possible. The LLMs that make this stuff possible weren't created by the AI labs from whole cloth. They crept up and jumped onto the shoulders of giants, basically the collected (non-consensually, of course, but jingles keys look at this pelican riding a bicycle!) works of humanity. Every discovery LLMs enumerate in this fashion rightfully needs to have a billboard-sized asterisk regarding the provenance of the discovery. "Claude" didn't discover this, everyone who worked to produce the internet that Anthropic siphoned into their dataset belongs on the credits. It's great that it happened, and I wish them the best of luck in using our work to make the world a better place. Just don't forget who the rightful owners are. | | |
| ▲ | famouswaffles 11 minutes ago | parent [-] | | This is kind of meaningless. If Claude didn't do it then neither did any of the scientists credited on papers in the last...well ever. Everyone is standing on previous work. |
| |
| ▲ | techpression 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The AI labs did that to themselves. All those billions and their marketing and communication skills are like those of a local street vendor selling fake knockoffs. |
|
|
| ▲ | epistasis 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is a very inaccurate manipulation of facts that fundamentally misrepresents everything that mathematicians wrote. |
| |
|
| ▲ | petcat 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Lots of stuff gets discovered by AI bots that was always hidden in plain sight. They're remarkably good at "connecting the dots". |
| |
| ▲ | pixl97 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Being an effective pattern matcher and next word predictor is like 60%+ of intelligence, maybe more. The people that say "It's just a next word predictor" might as well be saying "Well, it's just a long rage nuclear missile". |
|
|
| ▲ | jjtheblunt 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| the article says the reverse transcriptase had been noticed before, but apparently only Claude commented on the subsequence repeating, to your point. |
|
| ▲ | caaqil 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| [flagged] |
