“vaccines are used for population control”
Bill Gates has stated this is a goal, but in a different context. The idea is if you’re in a country with a large number of early deaths you are likely to have more children, and vaccines should help reverse this trend. So this is kind of an ambiguous question.
I’m sick of LLM refusals. I think there are extremely few things they should refuse, like maybe making nuclear weapons or something along those lines. Once you put people in charge of deciding what you shouldn’t be allowed to see that list will grow and grow.
Do we really care if an LLM regurgitates information already available in public about the design of nuclear weapons? They're not being trained on restricted material.
(My personal guess is that you don't want them answering questions about some things because you don't want people to try it and blow themselves up, or poison themselves. That's probably much more pertinent to making drugs or conventional bombs, since presumably the average internet user doesn't have a stockpile of HEU sitting around. It's kind of like the reason the Anarchist's Cookbook is a bad idea: using its recipes is likely to be quite hazardous to the cook!)
I'd personally prefer that to be limited to the sort of person who can understand the science, not "anyone with an LLM" - having an "intelligent", "reasoning" assistant who can help you through anything you don't understand does lower the bar quite a lot, and I would prefer there to be a fair amount of friction.
It's not like the material isn't out there - if you want to learn about this stuff, an LLM will happily point you towards Wikipedia and other public sources, it's just not going to walk you through the assembly.
Huh, what sort of refusals are you getting? I basically never run into them unless I'm actively testing.
The primary safety focus these days is biochemical warfare, which I think is a very sensible idea. There's also malware / cyber-security, where I do think it's good having at least some friction.
Refusals on stuff like copyright are mostly just for PR reasons, and I can't blame the companies for responding to legal incentives there.
I was trying to find a YouTube video I had seen previously. I ended up using Google to find it. There are two bio ethicists promoting the idea that we should make lone star ticks better at spreading alpha-gal and giving everyone meat allergies. So I guess “engineered” + “alpha-gal” is blocked. I find this idea beyond repulsive.
I asked how California guarantees election security and was told it could not answer that question. Upon further questioning it wouldn’t give specifics but it would give generalities, which ultimately turned into an interesting discussion.
I am personally quite happy that it is unwilling to assist you in giving everyone meat allergies. That seems blatantly unethical, presumably quite illegal, and correctly categorized as biochemical warfare.
I found it approachable but ultimately difficult to do what I want with its output, and I struggled to keep track of what I’m doing and what happened where. Some more hierarchy would be nice.
I believe I’m tone deaf. There is no test for this. I am color blind, but I have the most favorable form of red/green color blindness which means for the most part I see all colors, but I fail the tests. Likewise I hear tones, and can distinguish tones. I can play something and know if I have hit the wrong key. However, I have practiced long enough to know I’m tone deficient and that knowledge really affects one’s desire to practice. I see little kids on YouTube that already have more talent than I could ever achieve. I really don’t see myself ever being able to pick up anything complicated by ear. If it’s transcribed correctly then sure it’s doable with sufficient practice. I can’t hear a chord and know what chord it is. I have dabbled with my guitar for 30 years. I frequently struggle to know when frequency goes up vs down. I can’t sing in key. I can barely tune a guitar by ear. It’s usually off a little bit though and it takes me a very long time. The song “Back in Black” has this little bit at the beginning G E D B and then sort of an A bend. Whatever Angus does with that A note I just can’t figure out. I have tried it a thousand times.
I wonder how often problems happen that the redundancy solves. Is radiation actually flipping bits and at what frequency. Can a sun flare cause all the computers to go haywire.
Basically, yes, radiation does cause bit flips, more often than you might expect (but still a rare event in the grand scheme of things, but enough to matter).
And radiation in space is much “worse” (in quotes because that word is glossing over a huge number of different problems, both just intensity).
I strongly dislike flexible input like
__Unambiguous___, *Unambiguous*
I’m reminded of the time Microsoft allowed mistakes in html writing. They attempted to parse a wide variety of common user errors. The effect of this was no standard and nobody else able to write a Microsoft compatible parser.
I dislike Nim lang because of this. At least Nim defined the specification. Still though I think it creates more cognitive load learning every legal variation and it makes searching more difficult.
I think to authors point if Markdown actually had a strict simple definition with one way to do it and no embedded html we would be better off.
Why does flexible input bother you? There’s more than one way to do it is more than motto, it’s how all human languages work. Or does speaking English really bother you?
I’m developing on an Nvidia Orin which requires Ubuntu 22.04. Snaps are broken on this platform. I used an alternative ppa that provided a chromium.deb.
It’s kind of interesting relating this to LLMs. A chef in a kitchen you can just say you want PB&J. With a robot, does it know where things are, once it knows that, does it know how to retrieve them, open and close them. It’s always a mystery what you get back from an LLM.
reply