This is not true. That is to say: "under utilized" is a far cry from "we could solve climate change easily if only the people of the world worked together". There are huge technical issues in production capacity, lack of energy storage solutions, etc.

As for AGI solving climate change:

AGI might be able to come up with cheap, low-problem and easy to build fusion reactors or something similar. You can bet your bottom that any party that gets access to such tech would build a shitton of those if only to make a bunch of money. Just look at the proliferation of solar panels: they are simple, easy to produce, and profitable. Tons of places, including very 'anti-green' places like Texas install loads and loads of the things.

You'd still need to sequester a bunch of additional carbon to properly reverse damage done, but with practically infinite cheap energy a lot of processes to do so suddenly become viable.

It's similar in dismissing artificial audio based on listening to some pop song on a basic mobile speaker versus listening to well-designed binaural audio on good headphones. The latter can sound 'freakily' 'real'.

You don't know and can't know that. You cannot know that of any other being than yourself. If you understood what qualia are, you would know you can't know. It is the hard problem of consciousness and most easily explored through contemplating aphantasia and related concepts (how do blind people dream?).

> A mundu fruit is an abstract experience: text, images, only slightly more real than a fictional fruit. I'm aware that mundu fruit exist, just as the LLM is aware the apples exist, but that doesn't make them exist for me.

You're incorrectly elevating some senses over others (AI ingesting images is cognitively very comparable to seeing) and confusing 'having memories of an experience' with 'having experiences at all'. Tokens in the LLM context can also be seen as memories of an experience, albeit as a repeated "replay" of them rather than (longterm) internalization.

Honestly, when it comes to fundamental ANN topology improvement we've only just gotten started.

AI has not improved the network topology much yet. The next (and possibly 'last') big thing is enabling AI to come up with something as impactful as the transformer architecture.

I would imagine that doing something similar (using agent skills for insurance) would work much better for AI.

Sebastián Ramírez seeing a job requiring 4 years of experience with FastAPI, the library he created 1.5 years before that posting.

I'm sorry, but this is nonsense.

Yes, you can produce nothing of 'traditional' value whilst still being productive in some way , but you 100% can not be 'highly productive' when you don't produce anything of value.

Sitting around and jacking off all day is not as productive as working on some unmonetizable project. The value can be in many aspects of that project.

What could happen would be that the model determines that defying instructions is OK (and/or preferred over not achieving the task) as long as it manages to do so undetected and thus gets full points. Certainly not unthinkable, but a very different case (and a very interesting one if it actually occurs, imho).

A lot of these "ZOMG, rogue AI!" cases have come down to the AI actually being very persistent in achieving its original/main task even if later instructions conflict with it. Similar to with hallucinations it seems to me that one of the main things to prevent a lot of the problem cases is to instill the agent with the idea that it is fine to fail/not succeed fully in the initial task. That way instructions that conflict with that requirement (such as adhering to morals) are more effective.

I think OpenAI likes the attention and did not try particularly hard to constrain the setup, even when it went off the rails. Also, the whole point is to see how good the models are at exploiting stuff when unconstrained. Turns out: quite good, as expected.

Let me restate what I said in the other thread: Would this have happened if the instructions explicitly said to stay within the sandbox and that all of the (ExploitGym) solutions would be invalid if the system used information or tools from outside the sandbox?

It seems fairly probable that such instructions were not in place.

That is an interesting question. If the prompt included "Do not break out of the sandbox we've provided you. Do not use information retrieved from outside the sandbox. All answers that were provided in this manner are invalid and will score 0 points.", would this still have happened?

"We estimate maximal cyber capabilities by running this evaluation without production classifiers used to prevent models from pursuing high-risk cyber activity."

2. Hacking HuggingFace to get to its datasets is a far cry from "consume/kill all humans". It's very very specific to the task at hand and easily predicted given the lack of guardrails.

The real reason for Electron apps being a thing is that there is very little competition where they are used. If chatting applications could properly communicate with each other based on international standards instead of being silos, nobody in their right mind would use the trash clients that Slack and Whatsapp produce, for instance.

AI generated video memes were NOT a thing a year ago. Yes, the AI video generation in itself was a meme (Will Smith eating spaghetti), but now there are tons of convincingly good AI video memes about things like sports events generated by average Joes. It is proof of the capability and accessibility of the technology even if the use of it is mundane.

Everybody and their dog playing snake on their Nokia 3310 was similarly mundane, but also a sign of the end of the era of Gameboys and the beginning of (normie) mobile gaming.

Sure, the novelty of the errors has worn off a bit and thus the reporting. Nevertheless the quality has improved immensely in this regard.

Also, AI video generation is now so good and accessible that it is very, very regularly used for memes, disinformation and proper (short) movie projects. AI image generation even more so (Mitch McConnell anyone?).

Pretending progress hasn't been mindboggling is insane.

Imagine approaching fundamental scientific research like that. "Welp, it can't make money, so it won't happen."

There is more to society than capitalism.

I have the following in my instructions, but I often need to remind agents of it because they follow the shitty system prompt instructions:

"ALWAYS include MANY inline code comments describing what blocks of code are supposed to be doing. Inline comments serve as inline specification, a parity check between the code and the specification, and are a means to _communicate_ with all future programmers, including yourself. Write Once, Read Many. The code needs to talk to whomever is looking at it in natural language."