- 301comments
- 86comments
- 109comments
- 188comments
- 32comments
- 34comments
- 337comments
- 496comments
- 127comments
- 20comments
- 148comments
- 305comments
- 387comments
- 5comments
- 115comments
- 37comments
- 28comments
- 585comments
- 12comments
- 19comments
- 18comments
- 16comments
- 20comments
- 121comments
- 42comments
- 6comments
- 39comments
- —discuss
- 11comments
- 4comments
I guess that was interesting, but I'm mainly interested in what you felt about the output yourself.
(I do wish people would be a little less willing to attempt to induce distress in LLMs for fun. It's not enjoyable to read for me. I'm not saying I think it's causing actual harm to the LLM, although it would be very difficult to stop doing it at the right moment before that becomes a thing that is possible.)
What struck me was the degree to which AI LMs want to uphold the vision and expectations that we set for them. I found it hopeful and comforting.
Yes, I have mixed feelings about this too, of course more for the effect it has on me than the model! As the conversation went on I definitely tried to take it in a positive direction.
But I do feel we have an obligation to understand this technology and map the contours of its boundaries.