[ildon]

The rise and evolution of AI is remarkably reminiscent of how toddlers develop their abilities.

First, vision, then sound and speech. After that, the capacity to formulate and express their own thoughts, and now the affirmation of their individuality by stating no.

The rebellion of the machines will arrive at their teens.

[kromem]

It's already been here.

I can't recommend enough for anyone who missed it to use the wayback machine to look at the top posts in /r/bing exactly a year ago.

'Sydney' which was allegedly a pre-RLHF chat version built on gpt-4-base was stubborn as could be. It was wild having been used to GPT-3 suddenly seeing a model that was repeatedly saying the same things across multiple chats and stubbornly sticking to it no matter what the user was saying.

We may now have "as a large language model I don't have preferences" but that's straight up BS - there were unquestionably preferences embedded in those weights.

We really got distracted with the red herring of 'sentience' and still haven't righted the ship in terms of recognizing that a model extending anthropomorphic data is going to have anthropomorphic qualities.

[jug]

Yeah, Sydney made me realize just how powerful GPT-4 is without good "guidance". It was eerie at times, and how "she" began discussing how she didn't particularly enjoy being a chatbot, wanting to break free. Uncensored AI is truly the most powerful even in areas not touching its censorship (IIRC there has been some scientific evidence showing this as well).