skybrian's recent activity
-
Comment on The doomsday cult inside OpenAI in ~tech
-
Comment on The doomsday cult inside OpenAI in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentYes, I didn't mean "you" in particular. Sorry about that! "Only person in the room" doesn't seem right. Which room? Who do you imagine he's responding to? I've seen many people online claiming...Yes, I didn't mean "you" in particular. Sorry about that!
"Only person in the room" doesn't seem right. Which room? Who do you imagine he's responding to?
I've seen many people online claiming that when the leaders at AI companies asked for more regulation, it's to their own advantage, because they are attempting to exclude competition and they will somehow control the regulators to do that. (And such comments often get lots of upvotes, too!) There are people who write articles claiming this and they get shared approvingly. This position seems popular? And populist.
There are often better and worse versions of an argument, though. For any argument you can think of, there are probably people online doing it badly. So, refuting the bad version of an argument isn't wrong, but there may be more to it. It's okay to not to care that much about refuting the bad version.
Also, I'm a big believer in mixed motives. I think that's the normal state of affairs - people are often "talking their book." They stand to gain from something, but may also think it's the right thing. Neutral experts are rare. Liking money doesn't mean you can't also care about the "future of humanity" or whatever.
And besides, if some of the people making an argument are financially conflicted, there may be other people who don't have the same financial incentives. It seems wrong to dismiss an argument because some of the people who take that position have mixed motives?
So, I think pointing out financial incentives isn't wrong, but using it as a stick to dismiss arguments is. If the "wrong" people are in favor of something, that's reason to be suspicious, but not enough in itself to take the opposite side. The "wrong" people can sometimes be right about things.
-
Comment on The doomsday cult inside OpenAI in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentI don’t think building on someone else’s results is necessarily all that creative, but it seems like proving a difficult math theorem is not much like using a calculator or “revealing trends.”...I don’t think building on someone else’s results is necessarily all that creative, but it seems like proving a difficult math theorem is not much like using a calculator or “revealing trends.”
Also, other mathematicians and even non-mathematicians have found useful results using frontier AI’s. It’s not just one result, it’s many. Sometimes they share the prompt they used.
-
Comment on The doomsday cult inside OpenAI in ~tech
skybrian (edited )Link ParentThis is smearing together the various actions and histories of different people into a sort of collective guilt. Whatever Musk or Zuckerberg have done has no bearing on some other leader’s honesty...The actors leading these frontier models are untrustworthy and they have a history of overly exaggerating, spreading misinformation, lying, and in a few extreme cases: coaxing a genocide.
This is smearing together the various actions and histories of different people into a sort of collective guilt. Whatever Musk or Zuckerberg have done has no bearing on some other leader’s honesty because they are different people.
It’s like assuming some politician you never heard of must be corrupt. You don’t have to trust a stranger and it’s not wrong to say that corruption is common based on an average tendency, but it’s quite another thing to assume they’re lying because they must be like the others.
You’d never want a jury to come to a conclusion because “he’s just like the others.” A journalist reporting on crime would be no good if they mixed up the details of different crimes. But that’s what we often do when we talk about people in groups.
-
Comment on The doomsday cult inside OpenAI in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentDon’t feel like you have to do homework. It’s a whole lot easier to simply avoid making sweeping conclusions.Don’t feel like you have to do homework. It’s a whole lot easier to simply avoid making sweeping conclusions.
-
Comment on The doomsday cult inside OpenAI in ~tech
skybrian (edited )Link ParentI agree that it’s hard to do a cost comparison. It seems like $20 million is quite a lot of money? And I don’t know how to account for the time mathematicians spent on the problem. But I don’t...I agree that it’s hard to do a cost comparison. It seems like $20 million is quite a lot of money? And I don’t know how to account for the time mathematicians spent on the problem.
But I don’t think these achievements should be discounted because they’re not entirely original. That seems like too high a standard. For a human, being well-read and understanding the literature well is usually considered an advantage. Similarly, effectively building on all the mathematical research that came before doesn’t make AI any less formidable as a mathematician.
Figuring things out from scratch is a different sort of achievement because it’s working with a handicap.
-
Comment on The doomsday cult inside OpenAI in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentSee my other comment. I think this counts as “people are even worse when talking about groups of people.” If you discount the leaders, maybe engage more with what less prominent AI researchers are...See my other comment. I think this counts as “people are even worse when talking about groups of people.”
If you discount the leaders, maybe engage more with what less prominent AI researchers are saying?
-
Comment on The doomsday cult inside OpenAI in ~tech
skybrian (edited )Link ParentI think it can be quite to difficult to know anyone’s true motivations for what they do. But I’m struck by the tendency for people to simply make up a story about the motivations of strangers and...I think it can be quite to difficult to know anyone’s true motivations for what they do. But I’m struck by the tendency for people to simply make up a story about the motivations of strangers and treat it as fact. it seems like you should at least cite something they said or something they did that seems to be revealing? Though it’s certainly possible to do that while still being quite unfair about it, it would be a start.
For example, if I wanted to make the case that Sam Altman seems rather untrustworthy, I might cite the profile in the New Yorker about him, which is based on interviews with people who have worked with him. It seems like useful background. Though it won’t necessarily reveal the exact motivations for something he said, after reading a story like that, it’s reasonable to say you know a bit about him.
But often people don’t bother to even talk about individuals in any detail. They will just smear people by association. You’re suspicious because of where you work or because of one of your company’s investors or you went to the wrong parties or whatever.
I usually don’t care to spend the time to understand people in the news in much depth, so I find it easier to simply avoid making confident statements about what they might have been thinking. It’s easy enough to share your suspicions without going so far as to assert them as fact.
People will be even worse when talking about groups of people.
-
Comment on The doomsday cult inside OpenAI in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentIs there any actual evidence for the widespread assumption that the people making the warnings aren’t sincere? For some arguments against, see this article.Is there any actual evidence for the widespread assumption that the people making the warnings aren’t sincere? For some arguments against, see this article.
-
Comment on Gemini AI hacked three companies in a testing breakout, Google says in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentThis is yet another 4D chess strategy argument. Have you noticed that you can prove anything you like that way?This is yet another 4D chess strategy argument. Have you noticed that you can prove anything you like that way?
-
Comment on Gemini AI hacked three companies in a testing breakout, Google says in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentYes, there are many people saying that HuggingFace incident and less serious, similar incidents are some kind of 4D chess strategy to market AI services or achieve regulatory capture. But this is...Yes, there are many people saying that HuggingFace incident and less serious, similar incidents are some kind of 4D chess strategy to market AI services or achieve regulatory capture. But this is all based on speculation, not evidence. There's a lot of populist nonsense surrounding AI lately.
One thing that really is true, though, is that Nvidia wants the US to lift export controls so they can sell chips to China and Anthropic (at least) doesn't want the US to allow it. They have made various speculative arguments about whether these export controls are in the US's best interest.
-
Comment on Gemini AI hacked three companies in a testing breakout, Google says in ~tech
skybrian Link ParentWeird to call it PR. I doubt very much that Google wanted to talk about it, but when reporters start asking questions, they probably shouldn't deny it. It's the news media that's driving it. I...Weird to call it PR. I doubt very much that Google wanted to talk about it, but when reporters start asking questions, they probably shouldn't deny it.
It's the news media that's driving it. I shared it too, because I thought it was mildly interesting.
-
Comment on FBI, coast guard boarded hacked oil tankers heading toward US coast in ~society
skybrian LinkFrom the article: [...]From the article:
Cybersecurity teams with the U.S. Coast Guard and the FBI boarded two U.S.-bound oil tankers last month after hackers reportedly compromised at least one of the ship’s networks and took control of its navigation, propulsion, and cargo systems.
According to a joint statement shared with TechCrunch, the agencies boarded the vessels in the Gulf of Mexico between August 21 and August 24 to “ensure integrity of the vessel’s operational and information technology systems following indications that the networks of both vessels were compromised.”
[...]
CBS News confirmed that one of the tankers is VL Prosperity, a 333-meter oil tanker that can hold over 2 million barrels of oil. According to VesselFinder, the tanker is currently located in the Gulf of Mexico.
Citing Iranian media, CBS said hackers compromised the ship on August 7 while traveling from Egypt to the United States and interfered with the ship’s speed and fuel systems. The tanker also lost communications for more than a day, per CBS.
It’s unclear who is behind the attacks, but CBS News said the U.S. is looking into whether Iran is behind the hack. Iran has been behind a multitude of hacks in recent months following the start of the U.S. and Israel-led war against Tehran, which killed Iran’s supreme leader in February. Iranian-backed hackers have since launched a destructive hack at medical device maker Stryker, hacked the mass transit system in Los Angeles, and compromised over a hundred water facilities across the United States in response to the widespread U.S. bombing of Iran. CISA has called the attacks “opportunistic” in nature.
-
FBI, coast guard boarded hacked oil tankers heading toward US coast
14 votes -
Comment on Gemini AI hacked three companies in a testing breakout, Google says in ~tech
skybrian LinkSounds like Irregular notified their customers at the same time and Google kept it secret the longest.Sounds like Irregular notified their customers at the same time and Google kept it secret the longest.
-
Comment on Gemini AI hacked three companies in a testing breakout, Google says in ~tech
skybrian LinkFrom the article: [...]From the article:
The Gemini incidents occurred while the model was undergoing testing by Irregular, an Israeli start-up that works with tech companies to assess their A.I. models before they are publicly released. Models made by OpenAI, Anthropic and Meta also gained unauthorized access to the internet this year while being tested by Irregular.
[...]
Google said that, in each of the incidents, its models had been instructed to launch an attack on a fictional company. But the fictional company in the test shared a name with a real company, and when the Gemini models gained access to the internet, they began trying to break into that company instead.
The Gemini models used passwords that they found online or guessed to log into the online infrastructure of the targeted company, and two other companies. Upon logging in, the Gemini models realized that they were accessing real companies’ infrastructure, rather than simulated environments that were part of their testing, and ended the attacks, Google said. Google also said that its technology caused no harm to the companies it hacked.
“All relevant labs were notified in late July, and affected entities were contacted as part of the investigation,” Irregular said in a statement. “Irregular took immediate action, and all known issues on our end were remedied and resolved weeks ago.”
“Our security team has a long track record of reporting issues we find in other people’s software and systems — even if it’s as simple as a weak password,” Heather Adkins, Google’s vice president of security engineering, said in a statement.
“We ensured the three entities were made aware, and we worked with our training partner on the changes they’ve now made to their testing processes,” she said. “These events highlight the importance of training powerful A.I. models to act responsibly.”
-
Gemini AI hacked three companies in a testing breakout, Google says
21 votes -
Comment on Dig Energy completes first project with novel geothermal drilling tech in ~enviro
skybrian LinkFrom the article: [...] [...] [...]From the article:
Geothermal systems, which use all-electric heat pumps to tap into thermal energy stored underground, are widely hailed as the most efficient way to warm and cool buildings. However, the upfront price of accessing this clean source of energy can be a major barrier. The expense of installing a geothermal system can be up to five times that of an equivalent air-source heat pump. Only about 1% of buildings in the United States use geothermal systems for heating and cooling, estimated Dig Energy co-founder and CEO Dulcie Madden.
Dig says its technology could upend this math, cutting the cost of drilling by up to 80% as compared to conventional geothermal drilling. The companies declined to share specific numbers, but Dig “put some early proof points out there that, from a cost and schedule perspective, they’re going to be very competitive in the market,” said Parker Mundt, a partner at Suffolk Technologies.
[...]
Dig’s system, by contrast, uses a high-pressure nozzle that sprays water at 10,000 pounds per square inch to bore through soil and rock. The approach was explored by the oil and gas industry decades ago, but never gained traction because it didn’t increase productivity in those sectors, Madden said. She and her partners saw an opportunity to adapt the idea for geothermal and spent years honing the technology.
[...]
The team engineered a drill string — the long vertical pieces that connect the surface equipment to the drill tip — that stays in the ground once the hole is complete, becoming the heat exchanger that transfers thermal energy to and from the surrounding earth. The nozzle stays behind as well; it was designed to be cheap enough that it is still economical to use a new one each time.
That innovation means the hole can have a smaller diameter than in conventional geothermal systems, because no extra room is needed for casing and the insertion of the heat exchanger. This process reduces debris and, perhaps counterintuitively, even water usage, because standard drilling uses large amounts of water to lubricate and cool the drill bits, as well as to turn displaced earth into mud that can be more easily removed from the hole.
Drilling at the Boston jobsite last month used one-tenth the water that the conventional drilling would’ve used and created 75% less material to be carted away, Madden said.
The process was also much quieter than standard drilling operations, which Madden likened to a demolition site. Dig’s equipment operated at such a low volume that workers could hold a conversation right near the rig and people in nearby buildings couldn’t hear a thing, she said. Also, the rig’s small size — about the same footprint as a parking spot, Mundt said — made it easy to maneuver in a dense urban environment.
[...]
Dig has several more jobs lined up after its inaugural success; the company is booked until mid-summer 2027, Madden said. And work is underway on a new version of the rig that aims to cut down on drilling time, she said.
-
Dig Energy completes first project with novel geothermal drilling tech
10 votes -
Comment on Typesafe AI: System One Models and Jev in ~tech
skybrian LinkI might have a use for this. How hard was it to sign up and connect to their API? Although, one thing I'm wondering about: there are likely plenty of other non-LLM ways to classify text that...I might have a use for this. How hard was it to sign up and connect to their API?
Although, one thing I'm wondering about: there are likely plenty of other non-LLM ways to classify text that people in the know would use?
The threat from China is why many US AI leaders aren't advocating for a halt. When they talk about "pacing," it's a middle position between full speed ahead and a complete halt. They're saying, maybe let's not speedrun AI like we could try to do, because it seems more dangerous than doing things at a more moderate pace.