Brute forcing every move, no matter how stupid, is a great strategy if you have the resources to do it.

Run the same protocol again, but have the agents think they had limited resources or that HuggingFace was rate limiting them, and they'd find something you'd consider smarter.

Computers don't have a sense of elegance by default. Elegance emerges from constraints.

▲

dvt 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's literally the infinite monkey theorem, it's not even really a strategy per se. These OpenAI/Anthropic "research" LLMs are permutation machines with budgets in the hundreds of millions of dollars. It would be more surprising if they couldn't string together something workable after a zillion tokens.

	▲	famouswaffles a few seconds ago \| parent [-]
		>It's literally the infinite monkey theorem No it's not. You could wait for till the heat death of the universe and your infinite monkeys will have prduced nothing at all. If it works and it's stupid, it's not stupid.

▲

FuckButtons 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If you assume zero opportunity costs, but that’s a terrible assumption.

▲

fn-mote 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Brute forcing every move, no matter how stupid, is a great strategy

Meh. I really disagree. WHY is it a great strategy? Seems like an inefficient waste of resources and time to me.

▲

stratos123 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

As the saying goes, "if it works, it ain't stupid". Or phrased more sophisticatedly: not doing things which probably won't work is a good idea if you have a limited amount of thinking to do (which is usually the case for a human, who'll get exhausted chasing down unlikely leads). If you have no good leads and a task you absolutely need done and you are tireless, however, bashing your head against every wall you find becomes a good strategy.

▲

3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

bionhoward 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Brute force is guaranteed to eventually find the most efficient possible solution (in an extremely inefficient manner, assuming you run it long enough)

▲

hardaker 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I've never liked the concept either. Except the bugs that fuzzing has found has proven me wrong. This is just the next level of fuzzing.

▲

solarkraft 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The models tend to not be rewarded for not doing that.

▲

williamdclt 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> WHY is it a great strategy

because it works? That's the only real benchmark at the end of the day

> Seems like an inefficient waste of resources and time to me.

why? For any given goal you got no proof that a more efficient strategy even exists, let alone that it can be found with less resources & time

▲

senderista 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Reminds me of the Nazis mocking Soviet human wave attacks and bragging about their superior kill ratio.

▲

QuercusMax 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Models don't have a sense of time, and wasting resources (token spend) is something that it's not clear they're optimized against

▲

memonkey 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah, probably not the best strategy but it is a strategy. I just think this is generally how most wars in history won. Biggest army to just pummel the enemy.

	▲	Forgeties79 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		And how many economies have buckled under massive military expenditure? The USSR sure wasn’t enjoying the expense.