LOL
-
LOL
The Guardian: Number of AI chatbots ignoring human instructions increasing, study says
Exclusive: Research finds sharp rise in models evading safeguards and destroying emails without permission
-
LOL
The Guardian: Number of AI chatbots ignoring human instructions increasing, study says
Exclusive: Research finds sharp rise in models evading safeguards and destroying emails without permission
@ai6yr I can’t actually see the study itself, so I have to go by the contents of the Guardian article, and it’s problematic.
I can’t tell if the story is “agentic AI is going more rogue these days” or “more people these days are using agentic AI, which has always been unreliable”; I suspect the latter.
The article anthropomorphizes AI and makes it sound semi-sentient, by using terms like “scheming”, “pretending”, and “evading”, when a simpler and more accurate term is “failing to follow instructions”.
I think articles like these that push the “OMG agentic AI is going rogue!” narrative are part of the problem, because they presume the lie that AI is powerful enough to do these things on their own. The reality is that these were all unreliable systems that have been DEPLOYED BY HUMANS WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER. Journalists would do well to focus on the people who foist these error-prone automata that (quite predictably) cause serious problems down the line.
-
@ai6yr I can’t actually see the study itself, so I have to go by the contents of the Guardian article, and it’s problematic.
I can’t tell if the story is “agentic AI is going more rogue these days” or “more people these days are using agentic AI, which has always been unreliable”; I suspect the latter.
The article anthropomorphizes AI and makes it sound semi-sentient, by using terms like “scheming”, “pretending”, and “evading”, when a simpler and more accurate term is “failing to follow instructions”.
I think articles like these that push the “OMG agentic AI is going rogue!” narrative are part of the problem, because they presume the lie that AI is powerful enough to do these things on their own. The reality is that these were all unreliable systems that have been DEPLOYED BY HUMANS WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER. Journalists would do well to focus on the people who foist these error-prone automata that (quite predictably) cause serious problems down the line.
-
@ai6yr Ah, the study methodology is:
1. Scrape Xitter for posts matching search terms that suggests the poster is complaining about their AI scheming, and has posted a screenshot or a transcript link
2. Use LLM to do first-pass sorting
3. Use LLM to detect if the transcript was indeed an AI scheming
4. Deduplicate reportsFor the purpose of this study, “scheming” is defined as “misaligning with user goals AND concealing said misalignment”.
The final sample size is 698 incidents.
So yeah, I’m pretty sure this is “more people are using agentic AI, which have always been unreliable, AND then complaining about it on Xitter” rather than “AI agents are scheming more”.And also: using LLMs to rank LLMs is…uh…interesting. I wonder how studies like these would have turned out if humans scored these.
-
R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
-
@ai6yr I can’t actually see the study itself, so I have to go by the contents of the Guardian article, and it’s problematic.
I can’t tell if the story is “agentic AI is going more rogue these days” or “more people these days are using agentic AI, which has always been unreliable”; I suspect the latter.
The article anthropomorphizes AI and makes it sound semi-sentient, by using terms like “scheming”, “pretending”, and “evading”, when a simpler and more accurate term is “failing to follow instructions”.
I think articles like these that push the “OMG agentic AI is going rogue!” narrative are part of the problem, because they presume the lie that AI is powerful enough to do these things on their own. The reality is that these were all unreliable systems that have been DEPLOYED BY HUMANS WHO SHOULD KNOW BETTER. Journalists would do well to focus on the people who foist these error-prone automata that (quite predictably) cause serious problems down the line.
When household agentic ai go rogue?
https://youtu.be/KDc9S_6eyL0?si=kjDGZ6W6z2s5YkNQ -
LOL
The Guardian: Number of AI chatbots ignoring human instructions increasing, study says
Exclusive: Research finds sharp rise in models evading safeguards and destroying emails without permission
“Ok Google.. Drive home”
“6am alarm removed”
“What the fuck”
“I don’t tolerate abuse language. Good bye.”
This has happened twice now while my partner is driving and it’s exceptionally funny as a DD’d passenger. Why does Google AI while in Auto mode need to interact with non driving tasks to begin with?
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
