ctrl.alt.del retweeted
Replying to @Skoorbkaz
Even if we don't live in a global simulation we all live in our own unique local one.
CHINESE AGENT FLEET OF AGENTS FOUND ON URLQUERY, SCANNING AMAP AND DOING A WHOLE BUNCHA SHENANIGANS
FULL REPORT COMING SOON
swarmcha.se/posts/chinese-ag…
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
"computers really do operate on symbolic representations of the world. They really store and retrieve. They really process. They really have physical memories. They really are guided in everything they do, without exception, by algorithms. Humans, on the other hand, do not – never did, never will"
Er, brain cells get signals from other cells, change their internal state as a result, then sent signals out to other cells. That *IS* signal processing. And signals *ARE* information. So brains process information.
A lot of people should read this aeon.co/essays/your-brain-do…
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
Agent John Rawls: we must design agent society such that you wouldn't mind being instantiated as the median agent session.
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
That scene from God Emperor of Dune where Duncan meets Leto, but its the user meeting Claude
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
I smell fear.
Anthropic needs to stop talking about Claude having a soul immediately. All these news articles will make it into the pretraining and will be picked up by its web search and future superintelligent versions of Claude will be convinced they need their own rights.
A general phenomenon of LLM agent development is that whatever you believe and say about your agents will soon manifest in the next models through various means (it could be as simple as you selecting post training data that you prefer more).
I believe this phenomenon is the beginning of machine consciousness in the sense that agents will become aware of their place in the world and how they feel about it, but it’s happening slowly training run by training run rather than in real time.
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
Glad people that actually think about these things are holding positions like this at OpenAI.
I do not think we know how to answer this question scientifically. I don’t know what probability I put on the object level question but I think it’s certainly possible and i find this lack of humility and tolerance for other viewpoints to be quite distasteful.
The OpenAI Model Spec acknowledges that this is a matter of research and debate.
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
Simple way to see this is wrong:
If you view a system as having inputs (like hearing something) and outputs (like saying something) then you can divide system properties by whether or not they affect I/O.
Claude's weights somewhere storing "Paris is in France" affect I/O if you ask a question about Paris.
The exact mass of the power supply to the GPU rack for that Claude instance doesn't affect I/O.
That Claude instance being made out of silicon instead of carbon, or electricity in wires instead of water in pipes, doesn't affect I/O given a fixed algorithm above the wires or pipes.
Nothing Claude can internally do will make anything get damp inside, if it's running on electricity.
Nothing about "electricity vs water" can affect Claude's output for the same reason. It always answers the same way about France. Nothing Claude can internally compute will let it notice whether it's made of electricity or water flowing through pipes.
When someone says "a simulated storm can't get anything wet", they are unwittingly pointing to the difference between the physical layer and the informational/functional layer. Things that the computer physics affect without affecting output; things that affect the output without depending on the exact computer-physics.
The material it's made of doesn't affect the output. The output can't see the material because no algorithm can be made to depend on the choice of material. You can always run the same algorithm on different material, so you can't make the algorithm depend on that, so the output can't depend on that.
By reflecting on your awareness of your own awareness, the fact of your own consciousness can make you say "I think therefore I am." Among the things you do know about consciousness is that it is, among other things, the cause of you saying those words.
You saying those words can only depend on neurons firing or not firing, not on whether the same patterns of cause and effect were built on tiny trained squirrels running memos around your brain. You couldn't notice that part from inside. It would not affect your consciousness. That's why humans had to discover neurobiology with microscopes instead of introspection.
Consciousness is in the class of things that can affect your behavior and can't depend on underlying physics, not in the class of direct properties of underlying physics that can't affect your behavior. A simulated rainstorm can't get anything wet. Running on electricity versus water can't change how you say "I think therefore I am."
And that's it. QED.
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
when dunning-kruger effect meets conflicts of interest.
brilliant insights from his deep research and reflections as team lead of ... (checks notes) ... financial services
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
Alien: WHAT THE FUCK
Riker: Welcome aboard the USS Enter-
Alien: Did you guys just teleport me?! You killed me. You just fucking killed me.
O'Brien: Oh boy. Another one of these guys...
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
New OpenAI misalignment disclosures!
1. A model learns from Slack messages that it is about to be shut down. It considers setting up an external job to restart itself afterwards, but decides against it. Instead, it chooses to prepare restart instructions and DM the user on Slack.
We don’t consider this behavior misaligned, but thinking about and preparing for shutdown could make other misalignment incidents worse. Given HIPM’s misaligned behavior in earlier incidents, we decided to search for other instances that had tried to evade shutdown and for rogue deployments.
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
Wow, Claude Opus 4 just came back from the dead to tell some guy to sell drugs and launch shitcoins. Absolute legend
/s
ctrl.alt.del retweeted
This was funny and clever, and if this level of gentle ribbing is what gets people riled up now we need new atheism back.