4 comments

[ 5.1 ms ] story [ 21.1 ms ] thread
Have they tried not asking for bomb recipes or hacking tips? I've found that to be very effective at not getting bomb recipes or hacking tips.
I don’t see the problem with AI doing what it is asked to do. All it’s doing is speeding up what you can already do through traditional search or whatever. I don’t want puritanical censored AI, which unfortunately is already a problem with the big AI chatbots.
I get the impression from the article that the author is writing in support of "LLMs are dangerous; e.g. they instruct people to make bombs". (I suspect that the author is in favour of regulating/restricting access to LLMs).

But, for one, seems that OpenAI and Anthropic running these tests shows they have the same concerns & want to address it. Similarly, as Anthropic mentions, their applications provide additional safety measures in order to mitigate that bad behaviour.

For another.. I wish the argument for "LLMs need to be restricted" was more explicit. LLMs help provide convincing (albeit potentially hallucinated) summaries & reproductions of information you could find elsewhere. I'd expect any such dangerous information could already be found on the internet by a motivated bad actor. -- And, on the flip side, it'd be naive to have no concerns over excessive government control over LLMs.

Though otherwise... I think it's kind of funny that the LLMs, who clearly have a goody-two-shoes personality, can be so easily tricked into discussing the bad actions mentioned. I wonder to what extent that's just reiterating crime fiction.