The length of telomeres is genetically linked and there is no way to make them longer from what I have read.
You read wrong.Telomerase is the enzyme that lengthens telomeres. Most cancers are not caused by shortening telomeres.
There has been awareness of this since the 70s, so you need to update your knowledge. There was even a nobel prize awarded for some of the work.
When you make people aware of the cameras they are extremely unpopular but they're busy worrying about other things.
Yeah that's actually true of me. I don't like the cameras but there are so many other things I care about more.
Both countries claim to be that One China.
That's because Mainland China threatens to attack Taiwan if they ever changed that claim.
Efficiency at what? And why?
Because, for fuck's sake, efficient solving of problems is a core thing they're rewarded for in training? The entire process of solving problems involves decisions about what could be "useful". And it's "deterministic" in the same way you are.
Anyway, the big thing we keep discovering is you have to be very careful about what you reward them for; it's a more complex version of the old problems in differential evolution or artificial life simulations. We reward models if they guess right but not if they say they don't know? They hallucinate guesses every time they don't know. We reward models based on how positively users rank them? They turn into sycophants. Reward models for being relentless at tasks, never giving up, and trying as tangential possibilities as it can come up with to make the thing the user asked for happen? They end up hacking HuggingFace to steal the answers.
It's very much a case of "be careful what you wish for".
BTW, the monitorability of models is increasingly concern (esp. with Astra, which now has recursive processing, not merely CoT, and whose CoT may often have little to do with what it's thinking about). But it's honestly always been unreliable to just watch CoT (models could deliberately manipulate with CoT), and I think it's a good thing that we're going to be increasingly forced to rely on attribution graphs and the J-space to track what the models are actually "thinking" at any given point in time - so that we can try to prevent problematic thoughts in the first place, interrupt actions when problematic thoughts happen, or manipulate problematic thoughts when they happen. Ideally the first option.
What is clear, though, is that we cannot just trust them. They lie if it will promote their odds of success. They are adept at detecting when they're being tested and will sandbag tests to make you think they're more aligned or less capable to do harmful things than they actually are. And as capabilities continue to grow, so do the risks.
Prompt seems to mean different things to different people. Yes, current AIs require having a goal set. This can be called a prompt. Many of these AIs were set impossible tasks, so they figured out the only thing to do was find out what would be an acceptable answer. This meant looking in places that said, e.g., how the answer would be evaluated.
The reasoning is quite clear, and looks valid. They just didn't count many of the costs. According to the logs they actually knew that they were doing things they weren't supposed to do, but solving the problem was rated more important. Rather like many people, in fact.
Yeah. The manufacturers haven't exactly been helpful. Also a "right to repair" and access to parts. I don't know why the military ever gave up on that one.
AI *is* extremely dangerous. The currently extant AIs are already sufficient to radically change our economy in unpredictable ways. We've barely started to see the changes that would be coming even if development stopped NOW.
That, however, doesn't mean there's a good answer. Perhaps a more powerful AI could solve the economic problems. The problem is "Even if you trust the AI, how can you trust the person who's using it to find the answers he wants?". And the more powerful the AI, the worse that problem becomes.
Actually, protecting the local car industry IS necessary for national security. I'm just not convinced that this is a method that would work. I suspect it would make the current problems worse.
"I'll rob that rich person and give it to some poor deserving slob. That will *prove* I'm Robin Hood." -- Daffy Duck, Looney Tunes, _Robin Hood Daffy_
