Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dTal's commentslogin

Your example evidence set is actually quite robust by US justice system standards. There are countless cases of innocent people getting sentenced to death for e.g. being the one to report the murder, often in the face of strong circumstantial counter evidence.

>a BBC spokesperson said: “In line with our editorial guidelines, we advise that no badges, flags, and emblems or symbols are worn or visible during filming, along with clothing with obvious branding or slogans.

Oh sure. In a few weeks the BBC will be drenched in poppy pins. I'll wager my left nut they won't edit those out.


>the sandboxes themselves may need to be kept up to date

The sandboxes don't need internet access to be kept up to date. They just need to be writable by something with internet access. There's a million ways of doing this. Run things under a hypervisor. Have a PXE boot server in your data center that serves an "updater" boot image, after performing host attestation. Or if you really want them to "update themselves", physically plug em in for the update, physically unplug them the rest of the time, and don't run updates during agentic testing.

>or may need to be monitored

The sandboxes don't need internet access to be monitored, they just need to be readable by something with internet access. Like a hypervisor, KVM. or a webcam pointed at the screen, in roughly ascending order of paranoia.

>or the sandboxes may need to updated

Did this one already! See above

>or they may be connected to specific services

That's just "not airgapped" rephrased.

This is just off the top of my head and I'm no infrastructure engineer. OpenAI saying "it's too hard" is a major cop out. The real reason is that they show no signs of actually giving a shit about AI "safety".


>The iRobot movie is like a parochial villager's imagining of what Asimov's books might contain before they have read them.

Eh. It's a surprisingly direct adaptation of "With Folded Hands" by Jack Williamson. Even the descriptions of the robots match.


Oh well as long as there's a tardigrade or two left that's all fine then...

There isn't infinite time left in "eventually" - maybe a billion years, out of 4.5 billion passed so far. A billion years is about how long it took to go from "multicellular colonies" to "concept of an animal". So no, not guaranteed to bounce back from mouldy radioactive slurry.

If you had been asked, in 2016, to describe the behavior of a "probabilistic database", I very much doubt you'd have described the behavior of 2026 LLMs. They are deeply surprising in many ways.

Hmm, so mosh augmented with this?

They function just fine as either 1) subsistence farmers, or 2) beneficiaries of an enormous machine designed largely by people who knew calculus. You used to be able to function fine as 3) subsistence hunter, but then members of group 1 destroyed most of the wild ecosystems, while group 2 paved what was left and turned it into luxury apartments.

For better or for worse, humanity has chosen the path of gods. We'd all better start thinking like gods.


Many Worlds Hypothesis is the extrapolation of taking Hilbert Space at face value, and dumping concepts like "wave function collapse" which privilege a particular future as the "real one that happened".

There's a possible future where you're President, but no possible future where you're a talking cucumber. This intuitive fact gets overlooked in pop culture explorations of Many Worlds, such as Everything Everwhere All At Once, which has ridiculous parallel universes which obey the rather more relaxed rules of "anything the writers can think of that looks silly", rather than "anything which can conceivably happen".


I think there is a possible future where "I" am a talking cucumber, though?

Ignoring that you have to give up a sense of personal identity at this point, there is nothing in the laws of physics that says the matter that makes up what we're presently calling me can't morph into a talking cucumber with a brain with my memories in it. It's just absurd number of extremely specific things that have to happen out of an ever more absurd number of possible things to happen.


Indeed such a strange configuration of matter would arguably no longer be "you", but I think an even more immediate point of philosophical incoherence is that it would certainly not be a cucumber. [Cucumber != cucumber] => false, QED.

If talking cucumber was too pedestrian for you, we could add stipulations until your intuition collapses. Perhaps, starting next week, the Earth begins to spontaneously turn into raspberry custard on Tuesdays. Perhaps the entire universe turns to custard! Just think of it - billions of lightyears of custard in every direction. Whoops, did I say billions? Too grounded! Let's make it a googolplex. And a single lone piece of rhubarb, floating somewhere in the middle of it all...

...sorry, couldn't resist. Joking aside, while we can quibble about the boundaries of the possible, the fact remains that there are boundaries - at least, if we're still talking about known physics. No evolution of the universal wave function will lead to a world where pi suddenly equals 3.


I love custard as much as the next man, but that ratio of rhubarb:custard would ruin my enjoyment of the Universe and leave me very grumpy.

It reminds me of that scene where the guy is upset about the ratio of ingredients in his wife's dessert:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRp-763aMy8


Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: