Can't help but shake an unsettling feeling about all this, frankly. I engage in some limited mathematical research and will often use any one of the latest frontier models to check some ideas. Lately, only the OpenAI models have been giving me a temporary message that says something like (paraphrasing from memory), "We're thinking extra hard about your request before we answer. You can choose another model to answer now or click here to learn more about why." When I click to read why it's doing this "extra thinking", the help page says that for cybersecurity and biosecurity-related information, it will review the answer and could refuse.
Now, keep in mind, I'm only asking strictly pure mathematical questions - nothing at all related to cyber or protein creation or biohacking or anything like that... And, like I said, only the OpenAI models are doing this. To be fair, all of the prompts have always eventually returned a satisfactory answer, as far as I can tell, and haven't used a weaker model to answer them. Maybe? I dunno, it has just struck me as odd every time it has given me that message to pure math prompts.
That's a great point regarding other camera networks like Ring. I'm not sure which ones bother me more.. probably Ring but it's close. Seems like we can't escape being surveilled 24/7 everywhere we go. :(
Agreed (unfortunately). It's also a good reminder IMHO to think and do engineering so we can one day be worthy of the title. Be the change you wish to see in the world. :)
What does it mean to be human in a world where machines can mimic our deepest bonds? For thoughtful readers, Jordan’s story offers a lens through which to examine the nature of identity, the limits of legal protections in the workplace, and the ethical challenges posed by artificial intelligence.
I don't know what the answer is necessarily but this declaration also appears very political in nature. If all of those Nobel laureates and high-profile researchers really do support the content of the declaration, why not attempt to meet with NIH leadership and work together on a solution? You know, reach out and talk this out? A public declaration and the resulting media attention from "opposite-side" news outlets just comes off as political gamesmanship to me, at least. Several other commenters have correctly pointed out the problems existing at the NIH and NIH-funded institutions so the "why now" question is especially relevant here. Anyone remember the massive research scandal involving Dr. Eliezer Masliah late last year?
They already tried the soft approach. It didn't work. The administration just fired the entire Vaccine Advisory Board. https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/vaccine-advice-van...
What bothers me is this: You are literally saying the opposite of what's actually happening. The entire NIH has been politicized. Kennedy does not believe in germ theory, or vaccines. It is well documented. This is a reaction to that.
reply