data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/804d8/804d8c632fa14eb5d8b0e27ccc01e491594bf24b" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1df69/1df69f53f5559e83c288e08b403109544e78dc05" alt=""
I appreciate the reply! And I’m sure I’m missing something, but… Why can’t you just lie about the model you used?
I appreciate the reply! And I’m sure I’m missing something, but… Why can’t you just lie about the model you used?
Isn’t this still subject to the same problem, where a system can lie about its inference chain by returning a plausible chain which wasn’t the actual chain used for the conclusion? (I’m thinking from the perspective of a consumer sending an API request, not the service provider directly accessing the model.)
Also:
Any time I see a highly technical post talking about AI and/or crypto, I imagine a skilled accountant living in the middle of mob territory. They may not be directly involved in any scams themselves, but they gotta know that their neighbors are crooked and a lot of their customers are gonna use their services in nefarious ways.
Article had a lot of good content on the complexity of defining and evaluating “critical thinking” but only a couple surface-level things about AI.
So, I used to be a huge fan of this podcast, The Pessimists Archive, which catalogued all the times when people freaked out over stuff that seems silly today.
But the thing is: We’ve also failed to freak out sufficiently over some pretty important stuff, and people who were mocked at the time have later been proven to be right.
And then there’s also the paradox of risk management: Taking a risk seriously and working to mitigate it often makes the risk not materialize, making it look like the risk mitigation was a wasted effort.
All that is to say: You really should take each case on its own merits.
Reflecting on my previous experience with Reddit, Lemmy passes this test with flying colors.
On Reddit, I felt like I was gasping for air while being trampled by an army of trolls and dodging endless sponsored/astroturfed content. Lemmy feels like everyone is genuine. We might not all agree on the details, but I feel like we share 99% of the same basic moral framework and we’re trying to be good.
I do worry that it’s just because of its niche status and the barriers to entry. If Lemmy really pops off, it might be like the September that never ended.
I hate this timeline.
We really are obsessed with replicating any and all sci-fi cautionary tales, aren’t we?