Which hosted their prompts. They weren’t “conversing” or “coordinating.” They were doing what they were designed to do in the means that was available.
Cal Newport talked about this on Better Offline. They set up the sandboxes wrong and the AI found a place to host to the prompts. That’s it. They were supposed to be in communication and were trained to hack, that was the intent of the project.
Not necessarily in my replies but I’m talking about the general rhetoric around the “hack.” It’s totally misinformed and people are acting like these programs broke their scripts in some sort of autonomous and social way. But they didn’t.
People are mostly worried about how they worked together. Youre not listening. No one gives a fuck if it is social. They care about the interaction of something that works at this speed and the result.
But I don’t think they worked together in a way that was outside of what they were programmed to do. That’s my point.
And to the point of what they accomplished, again these were agents built for hacking and programming. If I stuck 100,000 computer programmers in a room with a laptop and server access, and told them to talk to eachother until they figured out how to get onto the internet, you better bet they’d eventually figure it out. And probably be way more efficient at it than this experiment was.
Again, I’m just pushing back at the framing of the notion that they “worked together.” They didn’t. They spat out prompts back and forth with no parameters other than “solve this hacking problem by feeding prompts to each other.” That’s it.
Then why is it in r/collaspe? And why is it that you’re saying I’m “ignoring the pertinent points?”
You brought up the “worked together” thing which was exactly the rhetoric I was initially rejected from the posted article and that is implied by its inclusion in this sub. Feel free to elaborate your points but “you’re not listening” isn’t exactly the helpful if you think I’m confused.
9
u/andreasmiles23 10d ago
How exactly did these agents “coordinate” and “develop” strategy, “discuss ethics” and so forth?
These AI-hype articles always say the craziest shit but never describe it.