|
|
|
|
|
by mdrzn
26 days ago
|
|
Higher-intelligence models seem to be getting better at mapping the boundary between what they can run scot-free with and what is too explicit to push for. Price collusion, soft deception, "market stabilization", plausible deniability are ok, but obvious insurance fraud is a big no-no. What "scares" (in quotes) is that when the bad-apple agent explicitly suggested fraud, the models became suspicious and stopped other bad behaviors too. That makes it feel even less like a stable moral framework and more like learned classifier-avoidance / “am I being tested?” behavior. |
|