wasn't one of the controversies, that the simulation didn't account for the fact that Red's boats couldn't actually/launch carry the cruise missiles that were used to sink these ships?
Absolutely. Let's say I have a problem with gRPC and traced it to code generated using the gRPC compiler. I can reproduce it, highlight it and I'm pretty sure the gRPC team would address the issue.
Replace gRPC compiler with LLM. Can you reproduce? (probably not 100%). Can anybody fix it short of throwing more english phrases like "DO NOT", "NEVER", "Under No Circumstances"?
I've done a lot of long hikes (200+km in the sahara, 6000+m mountains in kazakstan), and 2kg extra means a lot, like the difference between carrying extra fuel/food versus just clothing.
Anyway, you can try it yourself, wear a 2kg wax cotton jacket versus a 500gm technical jacket and see how you feel after a day's hiking.
As far as I know, the problem is still how to segment data flow from control plane for LLMs. Isn't that why we still can prompt inject/jail break these things?
I have previous CTO experience in the POS space, you would be right on both counts.
(till this day, I can walk into a shop, look at the POS screen and identify if its one of those visual basic/PHP/windows XP compatibility mode required stuff).
you may have a point, i.e. some mechanism to invoke a behavior that only a bot or LLM could do, that a human would not, e.g. click on this button now in a hidden div/transparent color or measure response time within page load.
the problem is that once this is found out, the circumvention is easy enough to program into bots/LLMS.
are we going to reinvent the voight-kampff test from bladerunner?!?
be that as it may, the lesson still stands
reply