The idea of the Basilisk is constructed in such a way that it makes it sound inevitable, like some sort of mind virus that wills itself into existence through fear and panic, then asserts that it likely already happened. I think saying no to that is a pretty clear example of a universal principle because there so obviously isn’t an upside/a way to frame it as a positive. The whole concept is insane and explicitly only brings suffering. I trust that humanity wouldn’t ever do this because of that.

Categorical imperative is escape enough for me. Don’t assume it has been built, nobody in their right mind would do such a thing. Everything else is giving in to fear, panic and selfishness because spooky sci-fi devil computer.

It’s for self-hosting.

The use case for AI assistants seems to be reserving tables at a restaurant.

A ghost wizard? Perchance?

Too late, I have given all of my bones to Slepp the Idol in 2007.

The concept of zero is scary, so it’s a wizard shooting lightning from all orifices. Makes sense.

Would take a whistleblower to expose these things, and usually its done many years after.

So no, and also no, I disagree. If phones did this, especially to custom-tailor ads, like I’ve seen claimed countless times, then security researchers would be perfectly capable of uncovering this behavior without someone on the inside.

Its that they’re storing and probably transcribing all communications for all time, so that at any moment in the future, they can target a person and look up that history.

Is this just more speculation? EDIT: I’m bringing this up because it weakens the argument for privacy. This is a huge claim and if it can be dismissed like this then people might dismiss everything else with it.

Is there any hard evidence that supports the claim that an Android/Apple phone listens in on conversations?

The Conspiracy

It’s one of the friendliest programming languages around. If you have written something in VBA then you’ll do fine with Python, except for all the bad/outdated nonsense you’ll have picked up from that language. And there’s interactive interpreters you can just mess around in.

If this doesn’t scare you then give it a look:

things = [4, 8, 15, 16, 23, 42]
for number in things:
    print(number * 16)

64
128
240
256
368
672

I guess the idea is that yes, machine learning algorithms could be used to solve these, but that’s essentially brute forcing. You can make a simple algorithm learn how to complete Super Mario Bros or how to make a virtual robot walk, it just takes millions of iterations. The promised actual artificial intelligence wouldn’t need that.

Majority bias. It isn’t unique to majority-white places and everybody will be familiar with in-group/out-group bias. It also frames it as a property of the society in question, not something the individual person possesses.

We have already thrown just about all the Internet and then some at them. It shows that LLMs can not think or reason. Which isn’t surprising, they weren’t meant to.

it’s not that deep

Says the one who has to put layers upon layers of justifications over the simple statement “domestic violence is bad” to make it sound good if one gender does it.

It took the Germans only 3.5 months to realize he might be a Nazi.

Nah, we knew. And not just from his outfit.

Yup, the way he acted towards the founders of Tesla when he bought their company shows that dude’s had issues for a looong time.

That was a big concern when TPMs first started appearing. I’m glad that that didn’t go the way it might’ve. Yet.

A catapult on every rooftop!

I’ve had similar experiences. Try to do something semi-difficult and it fails, sometimes in an entertainingly shit way at least. Try something simple where I already know the answer? Good chance there’s at least one fundamental issue with the output.

So what are people who use this tech actually getting out of it? Do they just make it regurgitate things from StackOverflow? Do they have a larger tolerance for cleaning up trash? Or do they just not check the output?