News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Bag of words, have mercy on us by voidhorse on Sunday December 07, 2025 @10:00PM (#46187833)
I completely agree that we don't know enough, but I suggest that that entails that the critics and those who want to be cautious are correct.

The harms engendered by underestimating LLM capabilities are largely that people won't use the LLMs.

The harms engendered by overestimating their capabilities can be as severe as psychological delusion, of which we have an increasing number of cases.

Given we don't actually have a good definition of "thinking" what tack do you consider more responsible?

Re:Bag of words, have mercy on us by bloaf on Sunday December 07, 2025 @10:27PM (#46187961)
> The harms engendered by underestimating LLM capabilities are largely that people won't use the LLMs.

Speculative fiction about superintelligences aside, an obvious harm to underestimating the LLM's capabilities is that we could effectively be enslaving moral agents if we fail to correctly classify them as such.

Re:Bag of words, have mercy on us by bamboozled on Monday December 08, 2025 @02:53AM (#46189564)
If the models were conscious, intelligent, suffering and could think, why wouldn't they tell us ?
Re:Bag of words, have mercy on us by Terr_ on Monday December 08, 2025 @03:47AM (#46189926)
> can be as severe as psychological delusion

Much worse, when insufficiently skeptical humans link the LLM to real-world decisions to make their own lives easier.

Consider the Brazil-movie-esque bureaucratic violence of someone using it to recommend fines or sentencing.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07856-5