Eeeenold Trusk

525 posts

Eeeenold Trusk

Eeeenold Trusk

@ymous749127

Katılım Ocak 2024
434 Takip Edilen25 Takipçiler
Eeeenold Trusk
Eeeenold Trusk@ymous749127·
@sama Ah yes… “give us all your data and kids data too”
English
0
0
0
0
Sam Altman
Sam Altman@sama·
cool use case of chatgpt work i heard last night: connect your family calendars and explain your kids' interests. every morning for the drive to school, have it make a podcast that talks about one kid's soccer game that afternoon, one kid's upcoming birthday, some news, etc.
English
3.3K
310
9.9K
8M
Paul W. Swaney III
Paul W. Swaney III@paulswaney3·
Whatever product manager came up with the “seems like AI slop” button for LinkedIn deserves a raise
Paul W. Swaney III tweet media
English
209
2K
71.7K
3.5M
Eeeenold Trusk
Eeeenold Trusk@ymous749127·
@GlobalNewsMontr If you now Moroccans, they are absolutely shameless pests who thrive on social welfare. Look at NL and DE. If anything, they would actually be supporting this.
English
0
0
0
6
Global News Monitor
Global News Monitor@GlobalNewsMontr·
Sorry but are Moroccans not ashamed of whats happening?
English
1.3K
1.8K
53.8K
2.7M
Eeeenold Trusk retweetledi
Eeeenold Trusk retweetledi
Google Research
Google Research@GoogleResearch·
Introducing the Science One Framework, an experimental autonomous research prototype that builds verifiable evidence chains. We demonstrate how natively maintaining these chains eliminates hallucinated citations and enables reproducible AI science. Read the blog to learn more: goo.gle/4wzlGWU
Google Research tweet media
English
47
289
2.1K
119.5K
Eeeenold Trusk retweetledi
Courtland Leer
Courtland Leer@courtlandleer·
> Anthropic has never advocated for a ban on open-weights models. Does this include lobbying for a ban? Fear mongering to make a ban more likely? Since you've clearly done both, this statement is dishonest at best and deceptive at worst. You're certainly allowed to behave this way, but it's precisely why you find yourself under so much criticism and scrutiny. > I don’t agree with the letter’s assertions that open-weights models necessarily make it easier to develop safeguards or that broad access to capabilities necessarily helps defenders more than attackers. I cannot see how this could be correct, we've seen time and again (as with encryption in the 90s & 2000s) that open and permissionless ecosystems are the fastest route to security hardening. Leaving this work to only an anointed few is extremely risky. > All sufficiently capable models, open and closed, should go through mandatory safety testing. How do we arrive at such safety testing? If it's this important, should we not leverage all the latent brilliance in the open ecosystem to reach speedy consensus in a decentralized manner? Or should we just wait for you to tell us what should be mandatory? Are you committed to keeping the regulatory threshold needed to a level that doesn't make this a de facto ban for all but the best resourced labs? > Whether open models do or don’t pose an increased risk, and whether that risk can be mitigated, is something that should emerge from testing, rather than be decided in advance... Yes, but the mandatory global testing you've suggested *is* deciding in advance. It *is* pre-regulating a nascent technology that will smother open innovation and directly benefit Anthropic. It *is* the authoritarianism you claim opposition to. And it also freezes the risks of today and makes them permanent instead of accelerating through the risk landscape to arrive at novel solutions faster. > My primary concern is the risk that authoritarian governments...build AI models that are more powerful than those built by the US... My primary concern is that within America, only a few labs are allowed to build powerful AI models that can pass the safety tests that they've written because they're the only ones well resourced enough to do so. The deck is stacked because fear mongering and reg capture lobbying has restricted access to the open weights models needed for everyone else to participate. Not only is this a less safe future, but it's one in which the US gives up it's primary advantage--a permissionless, freely competitive ecosystem that drives accelerated innovation relative to our centralized rivals. That sounds pretty authoritarian to me.
Anthropic@AnthropicAI

There’s been a lot of speculation about where we stand on open-weights models. We’ve outlined our views in full here: anthropic.com/news/position-…

English
6
46
348
25K
Parody Jeff
Parody Jeff@Parodyjeffx·
If Jesus walked into Jerusalem today, the Jews would kill him.
English
1.7K
3.8K
42.5K
790.9K
Eeeenold Trusk
Eeeenold Trusk@ymous749127·
@mooncat_is It doesn’t show lack of imagination. But it does show your lack of understanding of the world of Cyber and vulnerabilities.
English
0
0
0
75
julia
julia@mooncat_is·
I think there’s a shocking lack of imagination in a lot of the CEOs/influencers pushing open models rn. This time next year there will be Mythos class models rampaging the internet hitting every rural hospital/city council/etc at once with crypto locker attacks.
andy jones@andy_l_jones

I think open source is <12 months behind the frontier, and the same security reaction you saw with Mythos/Fable will likely happen with open source sometime in the next year. To my mind, the escape routes are (1) Frontier models desensitize the security apparatus sufficiently that open source hitting the same levels doesn't spook folks. Could be by genuinely fixing a lot of the worst security issues a la Glasswing, could be by just folks familiarizing themselves and deciding they're not as worried as they were. (2) Convince decisionmakers that industry benefits to open source exceed the security costs. I think this is an easy case to make now but will be a much harder one after the first effective open-model-driven cyberattacks. (3) A research program that makes open source models as safe as closed models. This'd mean some combination of (a) Suppressing the concerning capabilities during training (b) Sensitizing the weights somehow so that adding those capabilities later is hard (c) Developing assurances a model doesn't contain backdoors (3) seems hard but a lot of the things we've accomplished the last few years have seemed hard, and various groups have made inroads on all components of the above. Picking some examples: (a) anthropic.com/research/off-s… (b) arxiv.org/abs/2408.00761 (c) microsoft.com/en-us/security…

English
248
39
680
549.3K
Eeeenold Trusk
Eeeenold Trusk@ymous749127·
@itsLIRAN Yeah. Print them forever on the internet. These retards should be isolated
English
0
0
0
104
Eeeenold Trusk
Eeeenold Trusk@ymous749127·
@notnotstorm These models are trained on the internet data. What is stopping people from doing it right now? By pulling data from the internet and building what you call an uncurable smallpox? When 3d printers were lauched, everyone was worried about people printing guns. Not many actually hv
English
0
0
1
62
Eeeenold Trusk
Eeeenold Trusk@ymous749127·
@RobertJBye This cunt of a company is going down the drain. Goodluck with your shit ipo.
English
0
0
0
29
Mauro
Mauro@MauroMedT·
@borisbarrera Me parece terrible que una actriz de esa calidad deba sufrir bullying, no te merecemos Florinda Meza
Español
7
7
427
9.9K
Anthropic
Anthropic@AnthropicAI·
We support this petition, signed by our CEO, several co-founders, and senior staff. Our own research on recursive self-improvement, published last month, points to the need for tools to deliberately pace the frontier of AI development so society can prepare. We’re glad to see broad agreement across the field. pacingthefrontier.com
English
1.4K
552
4.8K
3.9M
Eeeenold Trusk
Eeeenold Trusk@ymous749127·
@FT Microsoft’s AI chief is a rejected retard.. the incident shows how bad OpenAI is at controlling their own model.
English
0
0
0
46