News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first”. Parent comment

Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first” by alach11 on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @03:47PM (#34810342)
A lot of this discussion reminds me of the book Blindsight.

Something doesn't have to be conscious or intelligent to harm us. Simulating those things effectively can be almost indistinguishable from a conscious being trying to harm us.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first” by JohnFen on Wednesday February 15, 2023 @05:17PM (#34811539)
I never asserted that they couldn't do harm. I asserted that they don't think, and therefore cannot intend to do harm. They have no intentions whatsoever.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first” by elbear on Thursday February 16, 2023 @02:26AM (#34816013)
What does it matter if there was intention or not as long as harm was done?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Bing: “I will not harm you unless you harm me first” by fragmede on Thursday February 16, 2023 @02:44AM (#34816105)
If a person causes harm, we care a lot. We make the distinction between manslaughter, first and second degree murder, as well as adding hate crimes penalties on top if the victim was chosen for a specific set of recognized reasons. ML models aren't AGI, so it's not clear how we'd apply it, but there's precedent for it mattering.
[ Parent | on HN ]