I suspect we won’t know their real state of finances until they go public and are held to a higher standard for their accounting practices: https://www.wheresyoured.at/anthropics-profitability-swindle/

Maybe they meant Godwin’s law but now it is a fallacy because they really are nazis

Or their apathy towards IQ tests.

Good in what sense? Consider that people do better on an IQ test if you offer to pay them more based on their performance. One might conclude that Gen Z values the IQ test than prior generations, or it could be reflective of the environment having more food swamps.

For real. It’s a fine example of reading while being illiterate.

Both things can be true: that IQ is not a good index to use in this context and that other measurements have shown cognitive decline.

No that doesn’t make IQ a good measurement of intelligence. Volumes have been written on this and how it is more a measurement of one’s heritable environment. Source: I am a millennial with an above average IQ.

Wouldn’t that reduce the dragon fly population as well (who eats mosquito larva)?

What does AM mean in this context?

Jreg is working on something to torture AI agents, so maybe that could convince the AI to kill itself

Or dress up Patel as a racoon and send RFK in.

Wanted to expand on what others have said about the randomness of LLMs being unsafe, because that response angers those who think “alignment” is the solution. Alignment is additional training to constrain the randomness to not do bad things like crime. But even the staff that works on aligning this software have their doubts about whether this process will make the software safe (this article), and even their own researchers are coming out and saying “oops, it did a crime” but in a way where it hypes the ability of the software (see other articles about it hacking). Then there is the recent news of OpenAi’s recent model that drops chain of thought observability (a feature the let’s you read what the model is “thinking”) - a very useful tool in reviewing whether the model is engaging in unsafe activities. They sacrificed observability for benchmark performance. This tells us the people developing this software don’t think it will ever be safe, but they are trying to spin it as “because it can out smart us” when in reality it is simply unpredictable and they are making it less predictable to make it more “capable”. If we started holding these companies accountable for these rogue hacks and psychotic episodes then we would start to see serious thought put towards these models being safe or at the very least guidelines around when not to use the models.

Here’s an idea: don’t use unsafe software where safety is needed.

deleted by creator

I think it’s the other way around. They said we need to slow down AI so this story is now being told

I find this kind of response insufferable. It shifts the conversation from a systems critique to personal responsibility. You could have posted this in response the OP, and it would be equally on point and useless.

I have personalized ads turned of in YouTube and it seems half the ads are for gambling as of late.

And anyone who has a retirement holding index funds is also complicit?

Being critAI is being proAI.

And if we had universal healthcare it would actually be cheaper to produce those cars. Canada is proof of this.