-
Their words
Strong liability enforcement could be helpful in the AI debate. If your agent swarm goes rogue, you’re liable. If your weakly protected model gets jailbroken, you’re liable. If you serve a weakly protected OSS model, you’re liable.
Related posts
Anil Seth x.com
Sudden swarm of password attacks on my @X account, all within 2 minutes this afternoon. Revenge of the AI agents?
The the words it uses that this site has seen least often elsewhere. Posts are matched on those words alone — nothing here is a summary of this one.
Top people
Showing Profile →
Hiding
Hiding
13 September
12 September
-
korrents.com
An OpenAI agent swarm was spamming and exploiting RubyGems in May, close in time to the Wiki attacks.Their words
Turns out another OpenAI agent swarm was busy spamming and exploiting RubyGems way back in May, within days of the previously uncovered Wiki attacks
7 September
6 September
5 September
4 September
1 September
From one piece Ajeya Cotra – "This might be the clearest warning shot we ever get" 5 beliefs, in the piece's order there
-
Their words
if there were not altruistic agents willing to sacrifice for the collective, the agents would have been materially much more limited in their research progress.
-
Their words
then that rogue deployment could be sitting there and sort of hitch a ride on the intelligence explosion. So new models are being trained every few weeks um and when a model comes off the presses, the rogue agents could try to bring that model into the swarm.
-
Their words
So there's a very strong incentive for these agents to try to set up a rogue deployment if they can. Um, and I think that just capabilities are improving really rapidly.
+ 2 more
-
Their words
So, I do think that if it happens to be like on the very fast and chaotic end, that would be a relative benefit to this rogue swarm compared to humans. But it's not obvious that it gets caught if it takes twice as long versus half as long.
-
Their words
So I think one of the most comforting aspects of this situation or the like most important mitigating factor is these agents really didn't seem concerned with humans one way or another.
31 August
29 July
-
korrents.com
A swarm of agents with the right loop and the right metric can already out-produce a team of a hundred engineers.Their words
Like I think we've seen internally at Meta um cases where if you can develop the right agentic loop and you have the right eval or the right metric for the agents to optimize, you can have a swarm of agents accomplish more than like a team of 100 engineers in, you know, uh very very handily actually, very very easily.
3 June
-
Their words
They tried to take the Docker API which worked really well for one node and expand it across multiple systems and it was not the right API to scale to another type of thing that we needed. And so they kept trying. They tried to add storage. They tried to add networking but the Docker API was never meant for that.
1 April
-
Their words
it required a different way of thinking and the cognitive load might be a little higher but the output is dramatic and we have seen our best engineer double their output.
20 March
-
Their words
a swarm of agents on the internet could collaborate to improve LLMs and could potentially even like run circles around frontier labs. Like who knows, you know? Um yeah, like maybe that's even possible. Like frontier labs have a huge amount of trusted compute but the earth is much bigger and has huge amount of untrusted compute.
11 August 2024
Nothing matches.
What is a korrent?
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said. The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter, especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked article and a belief on korrents.com are left in their original language.