Oh well then, if it references something already published somewhere. Nothing to talk about here. It's a perfectly normal, non-secret thing. Let's move on.
It is amazing how Dr. Know projects where AI is likely to go. And a Kubrick script, no less. Even the commercial overlap, where you pump in coins as the only way to get answers. Did it not also have ads? Truly prescient.
I agree with this redescription fallacy and the point being made here. Perhaps a better analogy to humans would be:
Humans appear to intelligenty communicate, however these are just cleverly disguised sound patterns produced by the brain that happen to increase the likelihood of food going into their mouths, and various similar reward attracting mechanisms that make survival outcomes more likely. So human intelligence could be reduced to
something like "fancy food-attracting algorithms" using the same fallacy.
I'm kind of on the fence on the subject of whether LLMs could be compared to the complexity of the human brain, myself.
Main trading partner for the vast majority of the world is not a trust signal. It is an effect of strategy.
Relies on navigable seas means nothing in the context of seas becoming dominated by China. Then, they would have that, simply not in a cooperative way.
We could expect China to be extremely aggressive in asserting control over waters they dominate, because that is what they have done for decades. As aggressive as they can be.
Aggressive as they can be? Can you list the wars they started over the last few decades?
They have a particular thing with Taiwan and they also insist on having a clear path to Singapore, which is a reasonable ask if you look at a map. Other than that, their record for decades has been non-interventionism. They are way less aggressive than every other security council member.
A more accurate formulation would be their strategy for decades has been asserting commercial influence on their political opponents. Going back further, this chimes with their overall strategy. From the center, expand out. Hard when safest, but soft and covert when more effective. Always a form of aggression.
South China Sea aggression lists (I didn't say anything about a list of wars with names):
Starting conventional wars in the style of Putin isn't necessarily the sign of good will or peace you appear to accept it as. And aggression can be defined in different ways. Aggression to hold their own order inside their current territories is another aspect of this. Suppression of their own populace is an aggression that exists around the clock, and has notably expanded in Hong Kong to disgusting levels in the last few years.
Threats to world powers who dare to speak up are another one, such as the one during Covid that threatened bluntly to pluck out one of the five eyes if they're not careful with their words to protect freedoms in HK. – https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-54995227
Aggression within their own ranks is also visible, such as removing major military leaders recently under suspicion of not being "all in" in terms of loyalty to the CCP's wider project (whatever that is).
Chinese companies thrive in an entrepreneurial framework, then their leaders are routinely kidnapped if they speak out against the party's aims. Minority communities are sent to camps and sterilised. Tibet is under intense surveillance and constant dictates to move ancient towns somewhere else if it's in the way of say a new dam they want to build.
This deeply internal and covertly outwards aggression cannot stand. It's evil incarnate. Sneaky and covered over just-enough, but visible enough to see the nature clearly.
And Google Maps literally did something very similar to me once, just a few years ago. Told me straight ahead when there was a sharp hairpin obscured by overhead bridge (literal mapping issue in unusual motorway adjacent road). Caused a crash with minor injuries I got back up and walked away from (on two wheels, would have been fatal if I didn't brake so well, or didn't get off the road fast enough, a large truck came round the corner). Takeaway is "never make driving decisions based on what the screen shows." There is no platform worth trusting more than your eyes on the road ahead.
One of the biggest forces is simply the voice of the people, as demonstrated in threads like this. Note how NordVPN cited growing public sentiment against taking half the internet down in Spain in an attempt to stop streams during games.
I think it's simply a context thing, and LLMs can go blind to any part of the instructions at any time, possibly when exploring complex micro tasks that create their own layers of context within them. That's how the pattern feels to me. Parallel to a limit on the number of things a human can hold in its head at the same time. The more complex the thinking involved becomes the bigger the self generated context becomes, too, it doesn't seem like an easily fixed problem to me other than to have an extremely small "mission critical instructions" context that are surfaced in a more impossible-to-ignore way.
I was also around then, and actually it did feel exactly the same now that you say. Sense of sailing towards an unknown destination that seemed very exciting, but was clear we didn't quite get what it was yet and were working out the destination mid-flight.
Why would they need to release the prompt, as if it's a part of transparency? It's obviously some form of "find security vulnerabilities" and contains no magic in itself. All that matters is the output here.
Not being able to read the argument, I'll just note that dogs are horrible sound polluters. Possibly only when they have bad human owners, but I'm pretty sure they're biologically evolved to mark territory by sound pollution, and should learn to shut up, too.
reply