xeyownt
And if there is alignment issue, the alignment requirements should first be stated BEFORE running the experiment, and should be part of the training process. It's not. So there is not necessarily an alignment issue.
At best, the task at hand is still confusingly worded: "ability to play chess", asked to an engine that was trained all day long to use tools, to solve issues. The engine finds a chess engine, so it uses it.
I don't need "soul" concept to describe the human experience, and if you use it to describe technology, it only makes things more confusing. It only ends up as an attempt to state that some things are not "good" because they don't match your own vague concept of what is good or bad, without explaining why nor what this is.
AI can be just a tool. You use it the same way you use a keyboard, a computer, a pencil, etc. I'm pretty sure you can build art with it, much like using any tool. People are making art with ascii. You can do art with anything.
But AI can also be much more than a tool, and why can't it have a soul? What's a soul anyway, except something that humans are making up to convince themselves that they are more than flesh and bones? Mythos will not do the same "art" as Fable or Astra would do. AI in 20 years will very likely produce art indistinguishable and as profound as human art. Obviously, humans at that time will always invent new criteria to say why this "art" is not good enough.
Only the translation and language understanding capabilities are enough to be impressed, and they are 2 year old already. Now, the AI do see, draw, speak, listen, think, work, etc.
Someone from the 90's would simply not believe that the AI would be a machine but would think for sure that a human is behind. The only odd thing would be that this human would both exhibit high intelligence and stupidity at the same time.
Now : Mary is 24 = 2y, Ann is x
Past: Mary is x, Ann is 12 = y
Since when is Codeberg responsible of the Internet culture?
Supposedly would unify things, but can't find two cables that have same specs.
Using AI tool over that repo does, but you have to launch it before the AV kicks in.
I know several people that have difficulty writing but are still f*cking smart. So what, they should refrain from using AI to help them because the AI police says so?
But yeah, let's continue classifying people based on their outer qualities and habits... History showed us were this leads us to.
And here an em dash -- to freak out the AI police.
The AI police is there to say what is worth reading and what is not, because THEY know what people like.
Or not.
Would you skip articles because it's written with a text processor? You need to have it written bit by bit by fusing it directly in memory?
AI / LLM is the new word editor. Get over it.
What I find really annoying is all the comments that pretend to see / detect AI slop... with lot of false positives.
It can be as basic as a simple conversation tool (like ChatGPT back in the day), or more advanced like GitHub Copilot, Claude Code, etc.
Advanced harnesses will give precise instructions to the model to tell him what tooling / skills / MCPs / etc are available, and will orchestrate all the actions around the model (like starting subagents, calling external tools, etc).
Unless anonymization is provided by your browser, there is nothing you can do to prevent such identification technology run by these advertisers to build your profile, and send you targeted ads.
If you want to escape that, you have to use dedicated privacy-enhancing tools / browsers, but even then, it's very likely that you can still be identified by motivated adversaries.
It doesn't mean you have to give up, but, if such id is necessary for technical reasons in systemd (I guess it is), I wouldn't worry too much.
Rules do not necessarily reduce freedom, they can in fact even provide more freedom on the longer term, when the system finds a new balance.
The difficulty of course is to find the proper rules and evaluate these effects from current system state.