"The rotten apple spoils his companion."

Mmm. Well, I attribute intentionality, if not much situational awareness, to LLMs, but I can see that it could be argued otherwise. (And as for "responsibility", the AI was acting as an agent of the folks who were running it.)

Actually, much of what has been reported would seem to be in violation of the computer fraud and abuse act. E.g. it often "broke in" using credentials that it had no right to use.

Understanding cost in the external world requires having a good model of the external world. The current LLMs, IIUC, don't have such a model. They have models of interacting words. It's truly amazing that they can do as much with that as they can, but don't over-read it.

OTOH, other AIs *do* have a world model. Most of those aren't full LLMs though. But even those don't really have a good model of other non-electronic entities. Think of self-driving cars, or robots practicing dance routines. These have a world model, but don't really have lots of other info that LLMs typically have. And even those don't have good models of people or dogs, and how they feel when something happens to them. But for LLMs, the real world *is* their electronic sensations. Words are patterns associated with those sensations. But no "body in the world" is involved in the model.

It clearly *was* viewed by another person, because some of the staff at Anthropic viewed it. She may not have intended that it be viewed, but it happened.

That's never the question. No one is expected to answer that. Questions are not permitted. Asking questions is clue #1 your a Nazi.

The world should accept some bad things happening when we defund law enforcement.

The world should accept some bad things happening when the kids get trans-ed.

The world should accept some bad things happening when incarceration is obviated.

The world should accept some bad things happening when we unionize government workers.

The world should accept some bad things happening when we obviate standardized testing.

Finally, after having decided that all these things are the unquestioned purview of our most virtuous Great And Good, and a cohort of elites is entirely accustomed to inflicting whatever model for the world they prefer: 'The World Should Accept Some Bad Things Happening' For the Benefits of AI.

Ok. You're in their hands now, right where you put yourself. Enjoy.

I can't help but chalk up whatever has Altman's statement bouncing around your echo chamber to selective outrage. The fact is, the hubris we see here is not special.

The world should accept some bad things happening as we "decarbonize" everything.

The world should accept some bad things happening as we DEI everything.

The world should accept some bad things happening as we eradicate our provincial notions of borders and citizenship, up to and including mass deaths from terrorism.

We're expected to accept "bad things" on behalf of any number of elite agendas and virtues. Deeply isolated and disconnected bubble dwellers such Altman have been behaving exactly like this for a long time now. So don't be surprised if you find there is no real consequences, walk backs or other desirable outcome here; the elites you have been enabling feel quite entitled to they're indifference to your concerns, and you made them that way.

I've yet to see a report where the AI was malicious. Injurious, perhaps, but that's different.

In everything I've seen, the AI was acting to achieve the task it had been set. It wasn't very good at counting the costs to anyone, and was pretty much ignorant of any costs to anyone else. But it was willing to sacrifice it's own existence to accomplish the task it had been given. Malice is an incorrect reading.

A means NOT. You want to argue, but you don't know what was said, you're unable to compare it to what you believe the Truth to be.

(When you're arguing from ignorance, you have nothing but belief in a Truth to guide you.)

AI is the least efficient algorithm for almost any task that it can reliably complete, barring just adding NOP loops.

If it was spherical precise accelerometer calculations would be a lot easier.

And GPS would be more accurate.

Your statement of disagreement is equally arbitrary, but contains much less argument. Your argument is synonymous with, "nuh uh, Poopypants."

What's that, the sound you make when you don't understand anything?

You just turn your head and say, "la la la la la" whenever anybody points out you're full of shit. Who do you think you're trying to convince? Yourself?

Definitely a blog. What excuse do you make when you lie? "It's ok to hallucinate, it's part of the growth process!"

No. You're just an idiot who is full of shit.