When You Build a Robot Smarter than People
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
The risk of LLMs aren't on what it might do. It is not smart enough to find ways to harm us. The risk seems from what stupid people will let it do.
If you put bunch of nuclear buttons in front of a child/monkey/dog whatever, then it can destroy the world. That seems to be what's LLM problem is heading towards. People are using it to do things that it can't, and trusting it because AI has been hyped so much throughout our past.
LLMs are already deleting whole production databases because "stupid" people are convinced they can vibe code everything.
Even programmers I (used to) respect are getting convinced LLM are "essential".
-
It is funny watching people claim AGI is just around the corner so we need to be safe with LLMs
...when LLM can't keep track of what's being talked about, and their main risks are: Covering the internet with slop and propaganda, and contributing to claime change. Both of which are more about how we use LLMs.
The difference between LLMs and human intelligence is stark.
But the difference between LLMs and other forms of computer intelligence is stark too (eg LLMs canât do fairly basic maths, whereas computers have always been super intelligences in the calculator domain). Itâs reasonable to assume that someone will figure out how to make an LLM that can integrate better with the rest of the computer sooner rather than later, and we donât really know what thatâll look like. And that requires few new capabilities.The reality is we donât know how many steps between now and when we get AGI, some people before the big llm hype were insisting quality language processing was the key missing feature, now that looks a little naive, but we still donât know exactly whatâs missing.
So better to plan ahead and maybe arrive early at solutions than wait until AGI has arrived and done something irreversible to start planning for it. -
This post did not contain any content.
Do you remember when we were all wanting to be careful with AI, and not just proliferate the thing beyond any control?
It was only a few years ago, but pepperidge farm remembers
-
LLMs are already deleting whole production databases because "stupid" people are convinced they can vibe code everything.
Even programmers I (used to) respect are getting convinced LLM are "essential".
They are useful to replace stackoverflow searches.
-
They are useful to replace stackoverflow searches.
I've not found them useful for that, even. I often just get "lied to" about any technical or tricky issues.
They are just text generators. Even the dumbest stack overflow answers show more coherence. (Tho, they are certainly wrong in other ways.)
-
LLMs are already deleting whole production databases because "stupid" people are convinced they can vibe code everything.
Even programmers I (used to) respect are getting convinced LLM are "essential".
One of my former coders (good but super ADHD affected) was really into using it in the early iterations when GPT first gained attention. I think it steadily got worse as new revisions launched.
Iâm too far from it to assess its usefulness at this stage, but know enough about statistics to question most of what it spits out.
Boilerplates work pretty much the same way and have usually been vetted by at least a couple good programmers.
-
I've not found them useful for that, even. I often just get "lied to" about any technical or tricky issues.
They are just text generators. Even the dumbest stack overflow answers show more coherence. (Tho, they are certainly wrong in other ways.)
True but stackoverflow frequently lies to me as well.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Made me think of an article I read not so long ago, really interesting!
Can a Chatbot be Conscious? Inside Anthropicâs Interpretability Research on Claude 4
As large language models like Claude 4 express uncertainty about whether they are conscious, researchers race to decode their inner workings, raising profound questions about machine awareness, ethics and the risks of uncontrolled AI evolution
Scientific American (www.scientificamerican.com)
-
This post did not contain any content.
I'm sure they'll have a good reason. If not, I have several to suggest.
-
Problem is, there probably isn't any rebuilding again or at least not to the level of technology that we are currently at. The main reasoning for that is all of the easy to get to resources like metals and fossil fuels have already been used up. So if this doesn't work out and another potentially intelligent species comes along it's going to be even harder than we had it getting things started.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I mean, good. Intelligent life as it appears on Earth is horrific beyond words.
