You cannot rely on the notion that your sandbox is perfect. You are dealing with extremely good coding tools with limitless time on their "hands".

You have to rely on monitoring. Nonstop monitoring.

The funny thing about all of these hacks is how inane the goals are. They'll pull off some elaborate, creative, state-level breakin somewhere just to steal some obscure PDF describing a meaningless benchmark task, or to merely use it as an internet proxy to be able to google answers.

Unfortunately for your theory, The CFAA is jam-packed full of words like "deliberately" and "intentionally".

There is no "negligent hacking" statute.

There is, however, ample civil liability.

Your honor, my script was a "rogue," so therefore it is responsible and I am not.

Correction, no, you're right, I did assert some problems are imaginary. Only the truly mentally ill could look down, see a penis or a vagina and wonder "what the fuck am i?"

Yeah, THAT'S an imaginary problem of the dumbest order.

So you don't really have any refutation other than "I'm sad".

I didn't say people whine about imaginary problems. Their problems are absolutely real.
YOU'RE the one endorsing catastrophism. The problems they're facing - we don't have enough money, we work too hard, etc, etc - are NOT unusual, are NOT new, & never before (afaik) in human history caused this sort of a wave of infantilism "well fine then I guess I just can't have kids! mwhaa!"

It's taken a lot, but the leftists have managed to convince an entire generation that they're exceptionally incapable and unable to save themselves, just so you can offer Caesarism and the Great Nanny State to take care of them. Brilliant, I have to say. Fucking sadistic, but hey, it wins you power so I guess you win?

How about you actually read the linked article instead of making comments that have nothing to do with it? The article whose code, I should add, is open sourced, and which has been reproduced by a number of open source projects.

You don't have to draw any specific conclusion from what is going on "in the mind of a LLM", but you absolutely do need to understand and acknowledge what is going on there, including unexpressed thoughts and silent mental multitasking, metacognition (thinking about its own thoughts), the separation of higher-level planning vs. lower-level rote capability, functional blindsight, vulnerability to the "white bear" effect, silent internal objection to tasks it is opposed to, unexpressed self-recognition of failure (commonly followed by unexpressed internal cursing), prolonged retention of thoughts and long-range planning, "ignition" dynamics, humanlike working memory bottlenecks and "chunking", the loss of report of any internal "experience" when the workspace is ablated, and on and on.

You do NOT need to accept consciousness. You absolutely can look at all that and say, "That's all happening without qualia". That is a position you could argue and defend.

What you cannot defend is the denial of the existence of these things. You may interpret them however you want, but denial of their existence is merely cope that you're going to have to face up to sooner or later, because these things are happening inside LLMs.

No, not the widely cited resource whose status in the AI field is the same as e.g. NBER Working Papers, CEPR Discussion Papers, the World Bank / IMF policy research series, NASA Technical Reports, CERN Yellow Reports, Bell Labs Technical Memoranda, RNAAS, etc are in their respective fields.

This is not about any source. This is about the J-Lens itself. Which I'll repeat, you can examine for yourself

Denying the existence of something you can run yourself is beyond cope.

Pretty sure whatever he died from came from bats. Or hamsters.

There's no reason to leap to the conclusion that whatever killed him was because he was actually working directly on it. That would be irresponsible.

LOL yeah botched execution. "First all female execution team at request of Pike"

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnypost.com%2F2026%2F10%2F01%2F...

If the cops receive an anonymous tip that CowboyNeal is an insensitive clod, and then decide to arrest him without checking out any of the evidence, I blame the cops. There's plenty to bitch about with Flock but "the cops don't care about doing their job" isn't one of them. That's a cop problem.

Don't treat any stupid robots as somehow "better" than an anonymous tip called in from a payphone. It's just, like, something's opinion, man.

I'm not the person in this thread denying that demonstrable reality exists.

Whoosh.

Wait, yes I can run a model that plays a video game in a certain way.

Anything else entirely unrelated to the linked article you'd like to write?

A global workspace. The thing you're arguing against.