It's about honor, I remember Saddam Hussein saying that after they held against the US for 40 days they "won" the war, because in their culture when a higher power entity goes against a weaker one, it is without honor and the weaker entity "wins" honor by being able to defend for that long.
ah, first sentence I thought yu was a typo. Second sentence I saw it I thought it might be a linux component of sorts. So it's not just a stylistic choice, it's actually harming my comprehension of what they're writing.
If you the user ask it to access a page (or do any task that probably needs that access), then it'll try to do so the best it can. Anything less is user-unfriendly behavior.
I disagree. If I turn off web search in the config, then the tool should not search the web, thank you very much. Maybe if I very explicitly ask it to, then it should try.
The whole succeed-at-all-costs idea is a big part of why there have been so many massive security screwups lately.
Well if you disable web search, that's just making that built-in tool unavailable to the agent (when it's enabled, the agent gets usage info and guidance about it in its context). Given a task in which online resources may be useful, the only thing the agent knows is that it could search the web, and that there are a variety of means (curl, wget, urllib in python, etc) which may be at its disposal. Without you telling it specifically not to search the web (or that guidance coming from elsewhere) or blocking internet access, there's no reason it wouldn't use that avenue in fulfilling its task.
I am well aware of why this phenomenon happens. That does not mean that I think that OpenAI’s (and Anthropic, etc’s) training or harness behavior is appropriate.
Would it really have been so hard to encode an indication of whether use of the public Internet is permissible in the prompt and to train the models to not attempt to exceed authorized access?
I'd say for the greater majority of users, when they tell their agent to do some task, particularly any that involves research (which isn't specifically about something on the local machine), using the internet is implicitly expected. Imagine having to go into my computer settings to flip an "allow internet usage" each time I want to use a browser. That's extremely user-unfriendly, and there's 0 reason to encode a default internet block when users expect their agent to handle their given tasks with minimal friction (I still recall the frustration of babysitting Claude permissions just a few months ago; auto-mode was the best feature ever for those of us who didn't want to go YOLO).
I think the idea is to rise the value of your currency, you rise the demand for your currency, by selling for it something that everybody wants, like gold.
Of course this demand is artificial and you'll run out of hold to sell at some point, but it can hopefully carry you over thd bump.
I still don’t get it. Why does everyone want gold? Its uses are some types of electronics and jewelry. Almost seems like crypto, it has value because it is somewhat rare… and everyone else also thinks it has value.
It’s similar to the valuation of crypto, being based on scarcity and mutual agreement, but without the risk of losing your funds from hacks or bugs, and without the benefit of online transfer. You can put it in a hole in the ground and it will be the exact same in 50 years. It’s shiny and has a history.
Nations like to use it for reserves because it’s stable, historically fit for the purpose of exchange, and well-understood. You can “count” it and use this to settle balances in a way that outsiders can’t easily interfere with.
Almost all “value” is strange and complex. Why is Francium, which is less useful than even gold, worth a theoretical $28 billion per ounce? (Not that you would find any buyers for that quantity.) Why is a Black Lotus card worth $3 million? Why is a dollar worth whatever you can buy for a dollar?
Gold ingot relative rarity + desirability + physical durability means it's a 'physical good' that is likely to retain value above a relative floor...ie it will always be worth something to someone, and virtually every country tracks their own estimate. Gold is a standard element of trade historically as it's a little difficult to steal (easier to defend physically) while being fairly simple to verify and measure.
Gold has been valued across almost all cultures for thousands of years. That creates an expectation that it will still be valued.
And, gold is limited (in recoverable quantities) in Earth's crust. Nobody can print a bunch more of it, unlike fiat currency.
Between those two, it's what many people reach for when they fear that the government is going to devalue their currency. They can buy now, with currency that will soon be worth less, and what they buy will be worth something even after the currency becomes worth less.
I really like this conspiracy behind this story/tale!
If you belive in such stories, it may explain why humans are so focused on Gold, and not other precious metals, which are much more rare.
The idea behind the story is just great, isnt it? The idea of whatever space travelling species to come here to mine for gold with human "robots" is really cool. While they could have landed on asteroids which much more Gold-per-ton, they chosed earth because the bio machines available here didnt need any "outer planetary" maintenance or refills?
:-D
edit: and they can replicate easily given enough environment, so you do not need spareparts when e.g. a disk fails?
You can see it is true in how well we folow instructions but as soon as we build any kind of hierarchy we act like we are in a tunnel chiseling riches as if there wont be food end of the shift. Ï would design them like that, no uprising, no revolution, no union. Their biggest fear, universal basic income, no more digging.
Half a million years later we are still at it. Innovation is like, rock music, bitcoin mining, minecraft etc
> when the bubble bursts, and it will, we will suddenly be left with millions of people thoroughly deskilled who will be useless. lots of reeducation needed, and lots of people will just be left behind.
what do you mean by this, that costs will become too high and people won't afford it? hardware won't go up in smoke "when the bubble bursts"
People won't be left without AI/LLMs. They'll be left with less value in their investments. The tech is here to stay, the market discovering the actual commercial value of these products won't change that.
maybe collapse in valuation, collapse in demand? I don't see that happening any time soon, it's too useful, idk how anyone can contest it is useful and not just hype.
most people who care about legality don't work in that field either. whoever gets into this probably starts by being ok with doing shady stuff, I imagine.
Many start in the military and eventually move to private sector. However, an ever growing percentage just straight up go to college to learn the skills.
Cyber companies are in the fortune 100 now, and it's not like it used to be back when you actually had to be interested in it and dedicate your life to learning the skillz from shady forums. Now it's just a job to most practitioners.
Yes, but also there is also a huge value to individual contributors and their careers. I broke into the field after landing a few relatively high profile CVE acknowledgements for big companies. Responsible disclosure is good for your career.
On the other hand, if the value of that drops you can expect to see some folks start taking the wrong path.
Don't ask me why/how, but some people do in fact sleep with a VR headset on. I've managed to get my hands on the Steam Frame, so naturally I started developing native software for it, and also joined a bunch of communities, and learning about a lot of new stuff I wasn't aware of since before.
Apparently a bunch of people hang out in a VR application called "VRChat" which is essentially the "Metaverse" Zuckerberg wanted to and failed to build. It's basically "video conference call for friends group on steroids", with custom avatars, full body tracking and a bunch of stuff. Apparently, some of these people who use this a lot, also sometimes "sleep together" in the game, wearing the headset, sometimes in public places, or wherever. Other people also seemingly put some calm background + music/tones and sleep to that, while wearing the headset.
Again, I've never done this myself, have no idea about the long-term effects (psychological or physically [the eyes?!]), but at least I hope this explains what "sleep in VR" would mean for many of the ones that do that.
but they sleep with their eyes closed right? I mean I can maybe understand the body tracking in the VR world but why in the world would I keep the headset on if my eyes are closed?
I assume most people sleep with their eyes closed, yes. Just like "having your eyes closed in a sleeping bag on the ground" counts as "sleeping under the stars" even if you don't actively look at the stars while sleeping, I guess the same goes for "VR sleeping".
I guess it matters too what the first/last thing you see when waking up/falling asleep. But again, never done this, can't say for sure.
Look I'm not perfect, I doom scroll quite a bit, play video games but compared to what you are saying apparently I'm only smoking cigarettes when others are on an IV of heroin.
Right, but your example presumes tpdays facebook market. Im presuming todays market where people are feeding all their ideas to a third party, much like how open source software is pilfered and turned into business ventures.
Now even if you want your idea to compete with all the other todo apps with your special sauce, youre giving a third party your recipe. That third party ostensibly has no reason to steal it, their business model does.
So, sure, if your app is a cult of personality and nothing special, i admit it doesnt matter.
But the number of software home runs is dwarfed by all other auccess on individual products
Why would OAI or anthropic care to steal your Todo app with 10k of revenue a month when they are spending billions?
At their scale I'd expect it to be only worth stealing potential home runs and even so, imagine they did this a couple of times, how would that make them look? Do you think it would be worth the bad blood and mass exodus that would follow?
Then what? math, the kind LLMs are making "obsolete" is a pursuit unlike any other. What other field would tickle the kind of mind attracted by math the same way? I doubt they went into it for the money.
Literally what else? Either you believe the future is AI + Humans, in which case most professions are open to you or you don’t in which case almost none are.
Ironically, this very attitude could lead to AI creating one of the biggest slowdowns in progress in history.
It's this one, but different careers will diminish at different rates. Mathematics was already not financially well rewarded, and current AI is basically better than everyone in the field.
> this very attitude could lead to AI creating one of the biggest slowdowns in progress in history
I think there are enough young people with pre-AI experience that we'll probably develop superintelligence before they retire, so I don't really think a near-term lack of fresh talent will result in any significant slowdown.
reply