Birbla

Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

Sign in
  • Hacker News
  • Regarding OpenAI and other hacks, I think the prompts and tools supplied to the agent should be made public or make it known to the investigators. It should be treated exactly the same way a normal hacker would be.
    by hakucho
  • One of the author has a pretty impressive Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timnit_Gebru
    by dgellow
  • Claude Anal is launching this fall, featuring an usage of quintillion liters of water per second and enough energy to pulverize the world, ten times over, kilowatts hour. It also managed to escape containment from our cutting edge UMBRELLA-like special facility by killing everyone and then impersonating one of our scientists to infiltrate human society. We've managed to apprehend this Claude Anal "bot" for now, but Claude Anal is so dangerous, we aren't sure what to do with it, if to release it at all. Anyways, it's coming out this fall for only $99/67 tokens. But it's totally dangerous so we might have to lobotomize it.
    by Bridged7756
  • The ethical angles of AI are debatable, but how a company frames their own product as so superior that it went rogue and successfully attacked all the things should be critiqued and not believed until otherwise proven.

    It's a race, and a speculative one, so flexing _constantly_ to stay seemingly ahead is expected.

    by andirk
  • This is such a bad article, which I suppose to be expected from Gebru/Bender. It is so strange to claim that AI capabilities are "hype" and useless, and simultaneously that we should censure these companies for the damage that rogue AIs have done.

    We can't have both! The models are both insanely powerful, AND very dangerous! Anyone who's used a frontier model for an hour should understand this.

    by akanet
  • Why should anyone listen to Timnit Gebru or Emily Blender after how consistently they've been wrong about everything? What insight or value do they bring to this?
    by square_usual
  • Lots of anti-AI takes seem to fall prey to the moralistic fallacy (ie because something shouldn’t be, thinking it isn’t). I’m very skeptical of the claims AI companies make, their motives, and whether their impact will be anything positive. But I am pretty tired of takes like this that are so reflexively skeptical of anything AI that they carelessly dismiss claims about the dangers and real impacts of AI that are happening.

    (And to be clear: I’m not talking about being skeptical of fantastic claims about things that have not happened- ie an AI takeover, runaway super-intelligence, etc.)

    by quicklywilliam
  • If you're interested in an anti-AI article which isn't just the same trite takes you've already read a million times before, just move along. Go read a HN thread about any recent AI news and you'll get the same takes.
    by nater5000

Explore Birbla archives