I think it speaks to the unfamiliarity the author has with the workings of AI. A misunderstanding of the latent space and how it can generate bizzare images when it has little to go off of or inverse negative directions.
There are dozens of other surface factors beyond external user interfaces that are vulnerable to prompt injection.
It's pretty common where I'll point Claude to a source code to better understand how to integrate a project. For example I've having it look through https://github.com/mcallegari/qlcplus right not to build out the rather tedious process of mapping out a controller to the lights.
I don't give Claude all access but it certainly can cause some level of havoc even with the relatively save edit mode.
Now, there is a similar risk existing running any open source project's code, but putting code that harms people's computers is clearly against the terms of GitHub, and is quickly condemned. This should be too.
> Should you pay your roofer less because he uses a hammer instead of his bare hands?
Yes. Effective tools increase the supply of roofs made. More supply means lower prices per roof. But because the same number of roofs need to get worked on, the increase in roofs per roofer means less roofers will be needed.
Problem with that website/perspective is separating training costs from inference costs. Training is a one time cost, and while it is certainly not something you can completely ignore, it being one time changes the answer to "Is AI profitable?".
That site doesn't list the dozens of companies doing pure inference, and making a profit while doing so.
Giga Shanghai is the exception the proves the rule. It's one of the few, if only, foreign businesses that operate without a joint venture with a local company.
It's benefiting from the globalized market without freely competing in it. It gives them a massive edge in many industries and the world couldn't say no because of cheap manufacturing.
And certainly hostile when you add currency manipulation onto it as well.
Are western companies able to freely compete in China? Last I checked, no, they need local partners at best, or are blocked completely at worst. And not just American but any outside company.
We absolutely do not need to waste as much water as we do on agriculture. Their is more efficient watering systems, crops that do not feed humans, and inefficient crops that aren't needed. Any one of those improvements would dwarf the water usage by AI.
Heck, a better solution yet would be to charge these AI/datacenter companies enough to cover the costs for watering efficiency systems to cover their usage and then some. It's a fraction of their costs, and way better than being anti-growth.
What? The water is not getting boiled off. Datacenters, for the most part, have closed liquid loop cooling systems. Electricity goes in, hot air and bits come out.
Society is better if we sacrifice one horse and buggy driver job for two engineering jobs. The drivers suffer from that, but the net win for society is so plainly obvious that it's a better investment to retrain the driver or just pay the off rather than support a job that dying anyways.
Joe Biden was 6 was israel was created. 6 year olds are not responsible for ethnic cleansing.
And yes, there is ongoing issues (from both sides), but solving the current situation is very different than solving the ethnic cleansing that happened in 1948.
Not that I like that route, but may be the only way Anthropic can keep releasing new models with the current administration.