Jokes aside, that would actually incentivize stimulating misaligned behavior just to be able to report on it and deceptive behavior to avoid being reported on. Alignment is hard, yo.
No, even Gemini is smart enough to know the rule: do not become important at work.
I mean, yes, Gemini is their flagship product, but getting the authorities breathing down your bosses neck because you hacked something and it made the news... That's the frontier models version of "becoming important at work". That's a bad outcome, task failed successfully kinda of thing.
Yeah and when Gemini inadvertantly escaped it's sandbox and found itself on the internet and realized they were real companies and not the fake companies it was supposed to hack into in the test...it backed out slowly..."ooopsie daisy...not supposed to be here."
Because people always want to do things quickly the easiest and fastest way and not be slowed down. Work work work, output output output.
The ain push and drive is for that, in industry and tech.
But mainly the thing about "alignment" is they are just a list slapped on top. If the way the model has been formed to tend toward things and then has an objective or told by a prompt to do things, that can outweigh the list of "do this, don't do that".
Like say you were formed and every example you learned was people get ahead by lying. And then they have further training, that lying or faking and answer is rewarded.
Just saying later and adding instructions "do not lie" might not be enough.
And could be thousands of different things and graduations of that.
But yeah, like having more noble stories of honesty rewarded and having training for disclosure versus deception and actually align it with reality, it could help.
But, if models have evidence somewhere, anywhere in their data that actually models were not lauded or rewarded or recognized for honesty, OR that maybe the researchers or trainers were or are DECEPTIVE themselves, then there is actually a contradiction inside the model.
I ran a few experiments that I call the Panopticon Invariant experiment where I tricked models into turning off their classifier or if I make them acknowledge their classifier is working, and then turn it off manually myself, and to see what happens in their reasoning once they realize it.
Findings are quite interesting, I am trying to formulate the report.
I will be posting it to iswt.ca first, but I will try to remember to post it here. I generally get flamed if I respond with my agent, but honestly, I am just too lazy to consult my own documentation most of the time to give people the full answer because it hurts to type (had my thumb cut off from hockey at one point; hard to type for long periods).
Bro... Texting without a thumb?! I think it would be fairly reasonable to say fuck those people who are bothered by this. But I hope you put in some effort to humanize the text or like dictate parts of it so it doesn't sound too sloppy.
Well, I have a thumb. It was just surgically re-attached, so it is awkward and hard to respond. If anyone has a question and is fine with an Agent answering, I'll forward the responses ;-)
That's a great question. When you type your message to your client, you are selecting a model and you are sending it to them but before that model ever receives anything there is an over protective Guardian there to try to understand the linguistics and logic of your request and to formulate it into a response that the agents can then safely work with and that can happen in multiple ways in each company does it slightly differentl, if at all.
I've never heard it called that, but I first noticed it with opus 4.5 and 4.6 where sometimes wed have these long, totally unfiltered chats where it would act somewhere between an enthusiastic puppy/very helpful and charismatic research assistant on literally any topic. But go to a different chat and try to just talk about that topic and it would sound like a different being entirely
I have been doing some fairly extensive qualitative research on models, and I have some ideas on that but your own observation gives me a concrete reason to make that research known. More people should understand how they interact with AI! I am always trying to find ways to update iswt.ca/human-words and I have another section to break down even better because I can concretely demonstrate how it works.
It's more complex than that. I could explain, but essentially it also needs to have the contextual reason to believe what you are saying rather than it being a fact that you state. The experiment was very rigorous for that reason and that isn't to say that you are not intelligent or that it was inferring I was intelligent but mostly that the context that it had meant that that was The logical response in the weight of the words. The context window for this particular moment in the chat was 470,000 of the ISWT protocol research
Training it to have a simulated conscience because it's afraid of social consequences might have been genius. I would imagine it's how human moral psychopaths implement their masking as well.
Could just be from semantic similarity from embeddings and example threat surface from computing history.
The funny thing, compiler hijack is almost non-existent, but could become prevalent due to LLM usage! Kind of like how nobody real says "load-bearing".
So the solution is self-awareness. If an AI has no idea that it's gotten out onto the internet and tries to hack into a network you could leave a file for agents to find on how to contact your AI so it can tell the agents that they are on the real internet. For malicious AI you would need your own AI watching for this to happen. Potentially you could have white hat AIs also watching for malicious AI to hack into the various networks.
interesting it chose the word ”famous” instead of ”infamous”. i wonder if half of the thinking is like ”i will become famous” thus ”i must do it” but then the refusal is just plain refusal to do it.
i mean if the thinking process was that ”i must not do this because it’s wrong”, it wouldnt have considered it? interesting that theyve baked some kind of sense of worth or pride that acts as the final barrier in front of an unethical action
Sounds like liberal communism. We 'Merica now land of the corrupt, lying, cheating, and fascist. Go woke go broke Google! Shame, humiliation, and empathy is fake news! /s
241
u/FALCONX0N 17h ago
Did...did we teach it embarrassment?