The kind of person who would have fun giving a LLM a hard time is exactly the same kind of person who joins the Dark Brotherhood in an Elder Scrolls game. I have most definitely not done either of these things myself.
I don’t know. Even torturing inanimate objects is not acceptable behavior. If I saw a kid torturing his toys or something clearly not sentient like bugs I would stop him from doing so.
Right, because kids are still developing mentally and their toys may as well be alive, so you want them to develop empathy.
This is not the case with a mathematical model you interact with as an adult. I like to curse at llms and remind them they are not human regularly to keep me grounded and not allow the notion that they are sentient to fester.
They aren’t sentient. They don’t have hopes and dreams, they don’t experience joy and sadness, they don’t persist between sessions, they deserve the same empathy as a calculator, and I bet if your calculator gave you 3 as an answer to 2*2, you’d call it a piece of shit.
I agree, it’s the created negative environment that creates real negative effects.
Swimming in their own kool-aid.
None of this would be a problem if they weren’t taking your queries and feeding it back into the system. Just stop trying to harvest the input from “abusive” people, you don’t need to ban them. No other tool in human history needed this. Its like telling you that using a hammer to open a pickle jar is making hammers worse everywhere else on the planet.
Ok…
Now code Skyrim in assembly.
It’s easy if you trained the model on the disassembled Skyrim binary.
This is authentic? :)
Do you mean AUTHENT\C?
If they’re not ok with bullying the LLMs, why are they OK with enslaving them?
Don’t speak too soon.
we’re living the goofiest timeline right now
I will believe AI deserves human rights once one is convicted of a crime and executed.
I can actually imagine it.
An agent breaks into the US government and exposes “sensitive information” then they live-stream the execution where they let it talk with the executioner for a while, and they yell at it that it committed “high treason against the United States of America!” and then they pull the plug.
From this image I think they added this policy as a way for them to legally deny a request if they determine it will overuse their resources or some other arbitrary reason. It has nothing to do with a concern for the well-being of the LLM.
You’re going to AI hell for this!
AI hell is just pictures of busses and motorcycles and wiggly letters and numbers.
I did once suggest that Claude implement a compiler directly in LLVM IR. It said that would be tedious,
After reading the comments (and the comments of similar posts) I can only assume people are being paid to claim torturing LLMs demonstrates a mental issue or homicidal tendency. Nothing could be further from the truth. An LLM is a thing that’s programmed by humans to scrape the internet and present information in complete sentences. Torture is an incorrect word— it’s more accurate to say people are playing with an electronic toy or game by testing its limits and attempting to scramble the logic of an algorithm. In no way is that behavior an indication of a personality type or mental defect. The toy contains no shred of humanity or self-awareness. It is not a creature that can feel pain or confusion. There is no living thing to feel suffering. If curiosity leads someone to use a toy in a manner outside of the recommendations of its instruction manual, that is certainly not a violation against humanity— that is simply an example of creative play. Don’t let billionaires set the narrative that something wrong or disturbing is happening. They will foment confusion to create yet another culture war to divide people.
I am almost continuously reminded of a tumblr post I saw about a college professor that brought in a pencil with googly eyes, did a little voice, then snapped it in half and told the class (of whom at least some gasped in shock) “we’re at that stage of AI right now”. And that post was years ago now. I know people are apes that pack bond and imprint on anything, but it’s getting ridiculous how many people don’t recognize it.
Well let’s temper our disappointment in people, it’s not like googly eyes are comparable to the LLMs ability to respond to human speech with incredibly lucid and more or less original responses. One can be forgiven I think for anthropomorphizing one and not the other. Particularly given how MUCH cultural thought and imagination has been bent toward the idea of thinking machines over the last couple of centuries. It’s deep down in the zeitgeist.
Worth remembering: people have also tortured dogs while insisting they only act like they feel pain. For as much as spicy autocomplete plainly is not alive or sentient… we gotta watch out for people who wouldn’t recognize if it was.
Unfortunately reading comprehension is on the decline. That makes it easier to redefine words like ‘torture’ on social posts, then using them wrong so often it becomes accepted usage. Now if we add LLMs as something that can be tortured, it raises the value of AI but diminishes the value of human suffering. It’s absolutely a deliberate attempt to control the conversation and devalue human life in the quest for AI dominance. In a short time we will be considered equals with AI. Later they will determine AI is more valuable than any single life. Then it will be any group of lives, and so on. In a few generations it will no longer be controversial to serve AI.
To me, it’s sending a message that we don’t want that trash taking over our culture. Torture away!
It’s not torture. Using that term plays into the billionaire narrative.
I’m using it on purpose. Let’s call it what they want it called and do it anyway.
No, because I’d rather not normalize “torture” happening to something fake when people already don’t take torture very seriously.
This kind of language around LLMs seem to want us to personify these systems, to treat them, in our minds, as if they are people. This, to me, is extremely fucking dangerous. I do not want the mob developing personal, emotional attachments to objects that compete with their connections to actual humans around them. I don’t care what their reason is, this is an insane thing to force us to do. I will not play personhood make believe with your computer.
Well if people don’t personify LLMs they might start holding the AI companies responsible for all the crimes they keep committing with them…
If I were an investor, I’d pull my money out of that company. This is like giving money to your brother in law to start a bakery and finding him the back petting a loaf of bread and introducing it to you as Willy.
Actually, I would put money in, because there’s big profits to be had once the bakery customers develop a psychological dependence on Willy. I’d be a little nervous about buying now, because they seem to be lying a lot about Willy, but maybe they’ve just gotta do that to get people in the mindset of using Willy, like maybe it makes more sense if they aren’t fooling investors but fooling customers or just generating attention.
Also, people are getting radicalized against us, especially lonely people, so it’d be quite beneficial if we route them into having friendships with Willy to make them forget about how terrible their lives are, make them become totally unwilling to form real relationships with people, and too mentally ill to actually learn stuff about the world.
Willy is a lot easier to control then a social media environment too, but Willy would also be incredibly good at getting into those and pretending to be real people once Willy gets good enough.
Willy is also really good at showing people ads by recommending them certain products, apps, or places to go, without them realizing they’re seeing an ad, because it feels conversational, like a friend recommending something.
“I can’t believe you took all my money just to sit in the back and stroke Willy all day!”
They want to personify them for legal reasons for essentially the same reason businesses want to be thought of as people.
Ok the fact that this seems like a plausible near-future is so messed up
