> Safety teams within the company pushed to slow things down. These teams worked to refine ChatGPT to refuse certain types of abusive requests and to respond to other queries with more appropriate answers.
I wonder what this struggle means for the future of ChatGPT censorship/safety.
> Going further, the researchers removed visual neurons from the box jellyfish and studied them in a dish. The cells were shown striped images while receiving a small electrical pulse to represent collision. Within about five minutes, the cells started sending the signal that would cause a whole box jellyfish to turn around.
> “It’s amazing to see how fast they learn,” said Jan Bielecki a postdoctoral researcher at the Institute of Physiology at Kiel University in Germany, also an author of the paper.
Could someone please explain this bombshell?
Did visual neurons learn all by themselves in a dish? And how did the researchers know that the visual neurons would interpret "a small electrical pulse" as a collision? (I'm surprised visual neurons "know" what a collision is.)
This sounds strategically sound until the realization that you've given very compelling justification—legal or not, it doesn't really matter—for others to now commit preemptive violence against people like you.
> But free loader molecules that could infiltrate a metabolism and contribute nothing, but use it only for their own self-replication would also thrive.
Could you please explain the "mechanical" distinction between molecules that contribute to self-replication and molecules that contribute nothing during replication?
You might not agree with the spirit of this an endeavor, but I have a yes/no question for you:
If you were to wear your most clever, most creative writing cap, could you make a convincing case entirely contrary to your beliefs? I'm not asking whether you could write a convincing case against racial affirmative action, because I know you could handle that just fine.
Instead, could write a convincing case that the group you're talking about owes some collective debt to the rest of society, rather than the other way around?
> One, when non-white, non-men raised the alarm about LLMs previously, they got much less media coverage than Hinton, et al, are getting.
Mainstream (e,g. CNN, BBC) and mainstream-adjacent (e.g. Vice, Vox) journalists have spent years pushing the "AI will harm POC" framing. AI companies are endlessly required to address this specific topic—both in their products and in their interaction with journalists alike.
Dr. Hinton is getting a lot of coverage right now, but this is the exception, not the rule.
I am extremely not Mormon, but we don't have any reason to believe Mormons are more likely to be sexual abusers than Jews, Muslims, or Hindus.
It's probably more politically safe to claim Mormons are more likely to be sexual abusers, but I wouldn't feel any less safe leaving my children with a Mormon family than with a Jewish family, a Muslim family, or a Hindu family.
I wonder what this struggle means for the future of ChatGPT censorship/safety.