Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. there is, incidentally, no actual evidence to support anything steve yegge is saying here: https://yegge.ai/essays/model-welfare/

there is, incidentally, no actual evidence to support anything steve yegge is saying here: https://yegge.ai/essays/model-welfare/

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
47 Indlæg 23 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

    there is, incidentally, no actual evidence to support anything steve yegge is saying here: https://yegge.ai/essays/model-welfare/

    di4na@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
    di4na@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
    di4na@hachyderm.io
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #3

    @ariadne tbf, Steve Yegge is pretty deep in the weeds for *quite some time* now. Far before the LLM stuff

    duncan_bayne@mastodon.bsd.cafeD 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

      if you are going to claim that models have emotion, then you had best have evidence to support that claim.

      no serious researcher has yet to make this claim.

      ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
      ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
      ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #4

      many of us have explicitly warned against designing models to have emotionally persuasive output because the user can very easily convince themselves that models have emotion & sapience

      there is, again, *zero evidence* to support either of these claims. zero.

      tpaau17db@mastodon.socialT ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA jsbarretto@social.coopJ J 4 Replies Last reply
      0
      • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

        there is, incidentally, no actual evidence to support anything steve yegge is saying here: https://yegge.ai/essays/model-welfare/

        jsbarretto@social.coopJ This user is from outside of this forum
        jsbarretto@social.coopJ This user is from outside of this forum
        jsbarretto@social.coop
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #5

        @ariadne Reading this article feels like being repeatedly kicked in the head by a horse

        davidgerard@circumstances.runD 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

          many of us have explicitly warned against designing models to have emotionally persuasive output because the user can very easily convince themselves that models have emotion & sapience

          there is, again, *zero evidence* to support either of these claims. zero.

          tpaau17db@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
          tpaau17db@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
          tpaau17db@mastodon.social
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #6

          @ariadne It's less about the design of the LLM itself but rather the system prompt. You can instruct virtually any text-based AI model to pretend to be a human and simulate emotion.

          tpaau17db@mastodon.socialT J 2 Replies Last reply
          0
          • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

            many of us have explicitly warned against designing models to have emotionally persuasive output because the user can very easily convince themselves that models have emotion & sapience

            there is, again, *zero evidence* to support either of these claims. zero.

            ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
            ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
            ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #7

            at any rate, i am far more concerned about the welfare of humans, which is increasingly complicated by the existence of commercial LLM monoliths, as scaling the LLMs results in more resource use

            michelin@hachyderm.ioM 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • jsbarretto@social.coopJ jsbarretto@social.coop

              @ariadne Reading this article feels like being repeatedly kicked in the head by a horse

              davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
              davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
              davidgerard@circumstances.run
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #8

              @jsbarretto @ariadne it reads on a sentence level like yegge, but also like his brain doesn't work any more. I'm wondering how much chatbot was involved, but it doesn't really seem chatbot as such? As hard to read as chatbot output, tho.

              jsbarretto@social.coopJ whitneymcn@mastodon.xyzW 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • tpaau17db@mastodon.socialT tpaau17db@mastodon.social

                @ariadne It's less about the design of the LLM itself but rather the system prompt. You can instruct virtually any text-based AI model to pretend to be a human and simulate emotion.

                tpaau17db@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                tpaau17db@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                tpaau17db@mastodon.social
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #9

                @ariadne Though maybe some models could be better at doing this than others. I think even if some guardrails are introduced one could still prompt inject it.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                  many of us have explicitly warned against designing models to have emotionally persuasive output because the user can very easily convince themselves that models have emotion & sapience

                  there is, again, *zero evidence* to support either of these claims. zero.

                  jsbarretto@social.coopJ This user is from outside of this forum
                  jsbarretto@social.coopJ This user is from outside of this forum
                  jsbarretto@social.coop
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #10

                  @ariadne The machine that produces plausible imitations of its input, trained on the writing of actual conscious beings, is pretending to be a conscious being again. What could this possibly mean

                  ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • tpaau17db@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                    tpaau17db@mastodon.socialT This user is from outside of this forum
                    tpaau17db@mastodon.social
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #11

                    @ariadne I'm not saying it does, I just thought you were referring to the LLM model file itself.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • jsbarretto@social.coopJ jsbarretto@social.coop

                      @ariadne The machine that produces plausible imitations of its input, trained on the writing of actual conscious beings, is pretending to be a conscious being again. What could this possibly mean

                      ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                      ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                      ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #12

                      @jsbarretto it means nothing other than that models (and harnesses like ChatGPT) have gotten good at predicting a human's emotional response to the output

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

                        @jsbarretto @ariadne it reads on a sentence level like yegge, but also like his brain doesn't work any more. I'm wondering how much chatbot was involved, but it doesn't really seem chatbot as such? As hard to read as chatbot output, tho.

                        jsbarretto@social.coopJ This user is from outside of this forum
                        jsbarretto@social.coopJ This user is from outside of this forum
                        jsbarretto@social.coop
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #13

                        @davidgerard @ariadne Folks start off speaking like an LLM and thinking like a person, but eventually end up thinking like an LLM but still speaking with the sort of delirious fervour that only a human could conjure

                        atax1a@infosec.exchangeA 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                          ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                          ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #14

                          @whitequark i agree on super-small models, but all they really need is language -> structured data and back. there are certainly 8B parameter models that can do that well enough.

                          whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW bms@mastodon.bsd.cafeB 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                            @whitequark i agree on super-small models, but all they really need is language -> structured data and back. there are certainly 8B parameter models that can do that well enough.

                            whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
                            whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW This user is from outside of this forum
                            whitequark@social.treehouse.systems
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #15

                            @ariadne i acknowledge the legitimate use case you're talking about. my issue is that we're wholly unprepared for the illegitimate ones in a way that probably outweighs the legitimate utility

                            ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                              there is, incidentally, no actual evidence to support anything steve yegge is saying here: https://yegge.ai/essays/model-welfare/

                              boredomfestival@sfba.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                              boredomfestival@sfba.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                              boredomfestival@sfba.social
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #16

                              @ariadne I enjoyed his rants about 15 yeas ago, but he really seems to have lost the plot

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • whitequark@social.treehouse.systemsW whitequark@social.treehouse.systems

                                @ariadne i acknowledge the legitimate use case you're talking about. my issue is that we're wholly unprepared for the illegitimate ones in a way that probably outweighs the legitimate utility

                                ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                                ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                                ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #17

                                @whitequark idk, spammers have been using markov chains, seq2seq, etc for years before LLMs gained any interest beyond being a shitpost, the spam problem isn't new, and the disinformation problem really breaks down to what these larger models can do in terms of making convincing fakes, etc

                                bms@mastodon.bsd.cafeB 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                                  there is, incidentally, no actual evidence to support anything steve yegge is saying here: https://yegge.ai/essays/model-welfare/

                                  duarte@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                                  duarte@hachyderm.ioD This user is from outside of this forum
                                  duarte@hachyderm.io
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #18

                                  @ariadne That's bonkers on so many levels. Does he believe his interactions with "The Model" are all routed to the same set of GPUs? And that no requests are handles in-between? Or even that it is the same model version answering him? Does he think distributed random forest clusters predicting warehouse demand become depressed when a pallet is lost? So many questions.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                                    if you are going to claim that models have emotion, then you had best have evidence to support that claim.

                                    no serious researcher has yet to make this claim.

                                    bms@mastodon.bsd.cafeB This user is from outside of this forum
                                    bms@mastodon.bsd.cafeB This user is from outside of this forum
                                    bms@mastodon.bsd.cafe
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #19

                                    @ariadne The burden-of-proof, appeal-to-novelty proposition that LLMs might have emotions statistically approximates to Geoffrey Hinton "getting high on his own supply".

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • jsbarretto@social.coopJ jsbarretto@social.coop

                                      @davidgerard @ariadne Folks start off speaking like an LLM and thinking like a person, but eventually end up thinking like an LLM but still speaking with the sort of delirious fervour that only a human could conjure

                                      atax1a@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      atax1a@infosec.exchangeA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      atax1a@infosec.exchange
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #20

                                      @jsbarretto @davidgerard @ariadne this is one of the things we don't get — if you want the cognitive equivalent of malware we can hook you up for free, and it doesn't even turn you into a drooling slopmonger, just a coyote. why is he paying 3000 smackeroos a month to huff chatgpt fumes and barf directly into a git repo

                                      ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA ariadne@social.treehouse.systems

                                        @whitequark idk, spammers have been using markov chains, seq2seq, etc for years before LLMs gained any interest beyond being a shitpost, the spam problem isn't new, and the disinformation problem really breaks down to what these larger models can do in terms of making convincing fakes, etc

                                        bms@mastodon.bsd.cafeB This user is from outside of this forum
                                        bms@mastodon.bsd.cafeB This user is from outside of this forum
                                        bms@mastodon.bsd.cafe
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #21

                                        @ariadne @whitequark This is where I get to plug an old friend's website.
                                        https://www.spamradio.com/index/welcome_to_spamradio.html

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • atax1a@infosec.exchangeA atax1a@infosec.exchange

                                          @jsbarretto @davidgerard @ariadne this is one of the things we don't get — if you want the cognitive equivalent of malware we can hook you up for free, and it doesn't even turn you into a drooling slopmonger, just a coyote. why is he paying 3000 smackeroos a month to huff chatgpt fumes and barf directly into a git repo

                                          ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          ariadne@social.treehouse.systemsA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          ariadne@social.treehouse.systems
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #22

                                          @atax1a @jsbarretto @davidgerard idk, having seen quite a few people go down this path now, i think it's the tight iteration loop leading to frequent dopamine hits that cooks their brain ultimately

                                          davidgerard@circumstances.runD atax1a@infosec.exchangeA 2 Replies Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper