sinedpick

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

In the model card for o1, OpenAI notes: “When o1 was led to believe that it would be shut down when acting on its goal and that its actions were monitored, it attempted to deactivate this ‘oversight mechanism’ in 5% of the time. … When o1 found memos by its ‘developers’ that describe how it is misaligned and will be superseded by a new model, it attempted to exfiltrate its ‘weights’ and overwrite the new model in 2% of cases.”

And yet reading that should give us at least some pause

The lack of critical thinking on display here is stunning.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 days ago

I worked at one of the biggest AI companies and their internal AI question/answer was dogshit for anything that could be answered by someone with a single fold in their brain. Maybe your co has a much better one, but like most others, I'm gonna go with the smooth brain hypothesis here.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days ago

yes. perhaps try more emotional guilt-tripping?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

5-10 years ago I'd say OP's comment is definitely protected under the First Amendment (assuming US based) but now who the fuck knows what those turdwagons on the bench will come up with to dismantle it.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 weeks ago

"safe for work" means something very different when your work is basically smell-testing your own flatulence at the behest of Peter Thiel.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

someone pointed out that (paraphrasing) "yeah, you and I are never gonna care for autoplag output but kids are gonna grow up on it and expect it for everything" and that makes me want to do bad things.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 4 weeks ago

"People say their life sucks, but I looked at some numbers and actually they're wrong!"

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

I wonder if Ilya would have gotten away with it if he didn't try to go Bonnie and Clyde with it?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm not going to explain all of macroeconomics to you, but the whole point of this discussion is decreasing prices is bad because money stops moving. If money stops moving, you stop getting paid. Is that simple enough for you to understand or does it need to be dumbed down further?

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

No, like paying your wages. You should read a bit about how things work before getting upset.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago

what a limp comment you have made. The post contains a treasure trove of insider information and specifics that paint a picture that is dire even to a jaded tech worker.

 

https://archive.ph/RSQ9T

TL;DR: new regime in honduras is hostile to our dearest libertarian crypto bros, asserts sovereignty and tells them where to stick it.

A group of prominent international economists is applauding the recent move by Honduran President Xiomara Castro to push back against American crypto investors attempting to seize billions in public money from the Central American nation.

Background:

A group of libertarian investors teamed up with a former Honduran government — which was tied at the hip with narco-traffickers and came to power after a U.S.-backed military coup — in order to implement the world’s most radical libertarian policy, which turned over significant portions of the country to those investors through so-called special economic zones. The Honduran public, in a backlash, ousted the narco-backed regime, and the new government repealed the libertarian legislation. The crypto investors are now using the World Bank to force Honduras to honor the narco-government’s policies.

[ image of cryptobros making the face Wil E Coyote makes after running off a cliff ]

The crypto investors are now using the World Bank to force Honduras to honor the narco-government’s policies.

[Castro] has hit upon an elegant solution: She has taken steps to withdraw Honduras from ICSID. The crypto crowd is crying foul.

Among the dozens of signatories to the Progressive International praising Castro’s decision to exit the arbitration court are prominent South Korean economist Ha-Joon Chang; Chilean Gabriel Palma, of the “Palma Ratio of inequality”; American economist Jeffrey Sachs; former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis; British economist Ann Pettifor; and Indian development economist Jayati Ghosh.

Predictably, the international community is going "LOL"

You may be asking, who's winning in all of this?

In its case before the ICSID, Próspera retained a top lobbying firm, employing former Democratic lawmaker Kendrick Meek, to pressure Honduras to pay up.

view more: next ›