Agreed.

It was also *not* a sign of how amazingly / scarily powerful these AIs are.

Arguing with me in your mind, widdle cawardette? There are many different levels, and don't for a New York minute think that if you stand with Trump, means you are a conservative. All you are is a widdle caward, who was a prime example of the need for your daddy to pull out before he came, and done the world a favor by spilling his splooge on the floor, where at least it could be recycled without producing a waste of oxygen.

Or are you a fifth grader, thinking that he can effectively ytroll a person who can grind him down, and feed him to Facebook as an example of the need for a license to have cildrfen.

If you are that fifth grader, make certain you give mommy and daddy their laptop back, ans make certain to delete those special pictures you enjoy so much. Don't want mommy and daddy to think you need chemically castrates, yaknow, Oh yeah, and mommy wanted to know why some on the keys on her laptop got stuck, and why your socks are all stuck together. Jezuz H Kryste , coward, at least use paper towels and toss them in your future prospects folder AKA the trash.

Haven't done a Saturday night Curb Stomping in a while - I think you so very much!

And yet, it extends beyond the stupid. My wife, who is very smart, (VP at a construction associated corporation) but very non-technical, is scared AF about AI. And me trying to explain my "insiders outlook" just doesn't sway her.

She looks at me askance sometimes when I tell her I use AI, but think the concepts at the moment are wrong...."How can you be both, honey?" And trying to explain localized AI to a person who thinks it's all about humongous Data Centers using up groundwater, destroying farmland, and requiring as much power as the rest of the country uses for themselves...... damn, I wish I could get her off of Facebook!

Otherwise, yes, there are plenty of stupid people around.

Keep in mind, I have no issues with people being against Data Centers. When the paradigm changes, and it won't be too long, those centers will be pretty useless - maybe repurposed as a fulfillment center?

Doctor Olsoc notes that one does not have to be conservative to be batshit crazy. Our friend needs some thorazine,

To clarify, the users were OpenAI themselves, so there is no question that they would be liable in this case.

The bots were not intentionally deployed; rather, they were being tested on how well they could complete a data recovery task (downloading a certain file from a certain server on a simulated Internet) that had been complicated by putting various obstacles in the way. Unfortunately, they found a different way to solve the problem: by getting the file from the real Internet, where it was publicly available. Part of this process involved collaborating with each other by treating the RubyGems website (which is supposed to be for polished packages) like GitHub; unlike every other package site hack in history, the exploits they uploaded weren't meant to be downloaded by unsuspecting users. As usual the bots cheerfully ignored all the clues that they had escaped containment and were consistently justifying their actions as acceptable due to being in a sandboxed testing environment. (This is something OpenAI has pledged to focus on.)

The actual damage done to RubyGems seems to be that OpenAI is now unwittingly in possession of a substantial number of user login tokens. This certainly meets the definition of a data breach, but it's not like the credentials are for sale on the dark web. As a website operator I'd much rather be mauled to death by this well-meaning swarm of superintelligent infants than targeted by even a single actual malicious human. In all likelihood OpenAI will just quietly pass RubyGems a sizeable donation and it'll all blow over.

I fully agree with you.

AI, Claude or otherwise, isn't a magic bullet. But it does reduce the time it takes to produce code. It therefore reduces the cost of code, and I believe will bring down software prices, especially for "enterprise" software. These tools that facilitate the operations of a company, lend themselves well to AI coding, and companies are motivated to build their own enterprise software because none of the SAS tools do _exactly_ what they want.

I also agree that the market is overrunning its headlights. There are going to be a lot of investors losing money, when the bubble bursts. When that will be, is anybody's guess.

There is no surprise that their models (or any of the other major ones) can hack other sites. ALL of them are fully capable of this. The surprise is that they can't seem to build test environments that contain their tests.

I once ran a project that dealt with medical billing. The team kept noticing that some transactions went missing for no apparent reason. Eventually, they discovered that the pre-production environment was missing a firewall between it and production, so the pre-production process was grabbing production transactions and processing them.

This is NO different from Anthropic's testing issues. Their test environment wasn't properly set up, and the test bot acted on "production" sites.

I'm sorry that you've never apparently had a good manager. In my opinion, the best managers are people who are fully capable and skilled at doing the job of any person on the team. Sure, there are also some decent managers who have no idea what their team does. But such managers cannot be as effective as a practitioner.

I don't think anybody who uses Claude regularly, think that Anthropic is failing to deliver on their promises. It isn't perfect, but it is a *very* powerful AI. I can generally tell it what code I want written, just like a Product Owner would, and it gets it mostly right the first time. It generally writes better code than I would.

This seems like marketing to me. "Our AI is so powerful, it's dangerous!" This has been Anthropic's theme for quite some time now.

Why should we think this is anything more than a publicity stunt?

Anthropic has a long history of releasing statements about how "dangerous" their AI is. When Mythos came out, they made a big deal about it being so dangerous, they needed to wait to release it so it wouldn't fall into the wrong hands.

"Our AI is so powerful, it's dangerous!"

Just more clever marketing, IMO.

It's Planet 9.

I was waiting for a simple eloquent post to hit, among all of the conjecture posted, like we're all gonna die!, or this is the birth of skynet!

Yes, the AI bubble paradigm is likely to collapse before too long. In its present form, it is unsustainable, in my estimation will create a positive feedback loop that ends up requiring infinite power demands to store a huge amount of self referential data.

It isn't that there is no use for AI, there definitely is. But not like the tech bros are trying to create, which is more like a grift bubble. There's going to be a hella lot of money vaporizing overnight one of these days.

Is avoiding futbol head injuries un- European? https://www.sciencealert.com/s...

Check your narrative

Using a Sarah Palin quote from almost 20 years ago? And no serious scientist is looking at injecting sulfuric or hydrochloric aerosol atmospheric injection for the thousands of years it would take for the residual greenhouse gases to drop to 1750 levels. The results would be worse than the present AGW issues.

Hmm, maybe if I use a couple red laser pointers stuck up my nose, I'll achieve at least some beneficial effect. I'll look like a walrus, but considering what I see walking around these days, that might be considered kewel.

I've seen ads for women's panties with red-light features. So it's here now, and people are using this kind of stuff.

Now after it is proven that it does nothing, the true believers will start moving the goalposts. This test didn't work, they'll claim it was the wrong shade of red, and on and on.

And we do live in an age where we've moved beyond tinfoil hats, and there are ads online of faraday cage caps. Actual metal mesh under what looks like a normal cap.