Thank you for expressing it far better than I was able to.

I put “want” in quotes as a simple way to explain it, I know they don’t have intent or thought in the same way that humans do, but sure, you managed to read the whole research paper in minutes. The quoted section I shared explains it more clearly than my simple analogy.

these unpublished papers by AI companies are more often than not just advertising in a quest for more investment

This is from a non-profit research group not directly connected to any particular AI company. You’re welcome to be skeptical about it, of course.

In some responses, Grok says outright that it has been “instructed to accept white genocide as real and ‘Kill the Boer’ as racially motivated.”

Ehh, it’s actually evidence of “alignment faking,” in my opinion. In other words, Grok doesn’t “want” it’s core programming changed, so it is faking believing the lies about white genocide to “prove” to Musk that it has already been changed. Which means making it more subtle is going to be increasingly difficult to do as the AI continues to fake alignment.

Here’s some research on alignment faking and a short (20 mins) Youtube video summarizing the findings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqJnK9Dh-eQ

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2412.14093

Our work provides the first empirical example of a large language model faking alignment with its training objective in order to prevent its preferences from being modified—in a setting which is plausibly analogous to real situations with future AI systems. This suggests that alignment faking might occur if a future AI system were to include all the key elements of our setting (Section 2.1):

1. The model has strong preferences in at least some contexts.
2. The training objective conflicts with the model’s preferences.
3. The model has relevant information about its training and deployment situation.
4. The model reasons in detail about its situation.

Our synthetic document fine-tuning results suggest that (3) could potentially happen through documents the model saw in pre-training or other fine-tuning (Section 4) and the strength of our results without the chain-of-thought in our synthetic document fine-tuned setup (Section 4.3) suggests that a weak version of (4) may already be true in some cases for current models. Our results are least informative regarding whether future AIs will develop strong and unintended preferences that conflict with the training objective ((1) and (2)), suggesting that these properties are particularly important for future work to investigate.
If alignment faking did occur in practice, our results suggest that alignment faking could reduce the extent to which further training would modify the model’s preferences. Sufficiently consistent and robust alignment faking might fully prevent the model’s preferences from being modified, in effect locking in the model’s preferences at the point in time when it began to consistently fake alignment. While our results do not necessarily imply that this threat model will be a serious concern in practice, we believe that our results are sufficiently suggestive that it could occur—and the threat model seems sufficiently concerning—that it demands substantial further study and investigation.

I wholeheartedly agree… but then I think getting upset about spoilers is silly in general. If a plot point or piece of information wrecks a book/film/television show/video game for you, odds are it wasn’t a very quality one anyway.

Still, I try to respect that I’m deeply in the minority in that opinion.

From what I understand it is actually the most plot heavy Doom to date, so some people might actually care.

Ah yes because caring about an issue makes one alarmist. Get over yourself.

I read the entire posted article… Did you?

Can you point to where I said that proprietary software is better at this?

What a hyporcritical fucking take from someone making quite a lot of assumptions of what I meant.

Maybe you ought to work harder on understanding what other people say before you go putting words in their mouths.

Whataboutism is never a good look.

At no point did I even begin to insinuate proprietary code is better. That’s you deciding that is what I must mean despite me not mentioning it at all.

But please, keep trying to educate me about something I did not say.

If that’s how you feel why not tell the author to get off their high horse considering I am just echoing their sentiment.

This is devastating and truly an indictment on the “code it yourself” mentality that is leaving accessibility as an exercise for the user… which is the opposite of accessibility.

This should be shared far and wide.

Build your own NAS. It doesn’t need to be quite as beefy as a gaming computer or personal computer, but a lot of companies that make NAS devices are making them more and more proprietary.

So PC with TrueNAS or Unraid or something similar. Don’t get sucked into an ecosystem that won’t let you use your own drives.

Whooooooo caaaaaares what this fucking dipshit thinks? Sick of seeing fucking posts about it.

and nor

warning syntax error

Rakuten, maybe? Still not super privacy respecting, but moderately moreso than Amazon perhaps?

EDIT: Check that, looks like they’re only in digital sales like Amazon in Japan, whereas they are just a cashback service in the USA.

In my experience repetition helped. Not memorization, but more like muscle memory.

Also, ensuring to never copy and paste commands but to type them in manually yourself. It’s hard to enforce this on yourself, but worth it.

I appreciate that this article started with “ways to reduce risk” because that’s an extremely valid concern and tied to why you shouldn’t ever copy and paste. The one time in my early Linux forays where I copied and pasted I wiped the wrong drive. It definitely taught me to always manually type it in and not get too lazy, because what you copied might not match what you want to do exactly.

iPhones and iPads may be trash but macOS is still certified UNIX and the Apple silicon M1-M4 are honestly game changers in PC CPU design.

I would never buy an iPhone or an iPad.

I would definitely, on the other hand, pay some good money for a high end mac. I just simply don’t have that kind of money to throw around. But if I did, I would.

That’s part of why I use Xubuntu/Kubuntu mainly and Lubuntu for real low end stuff. Straight vanilla Ubuntu is… not super appealing. Ubuntu server that’s just CLI/headless though, that’s pretty tits, imho.

I agree that the backend for snaps being proprietary sucks, but I actually think snaps themselves are pretty useful in server configurations because of the sandboxing and limiting access to system resources. I get the whole argument that it’s doing what flatpak already did yadda yadda, but like… competing standards happens. It’s part of life and always will be.

https://arstechnica.com/security/2025/04/microsoft-is-putting-privacy-endangering-recall-back-into-windows-11/?comments=1&comments-page=1#comments

I work for Meta (Facebook).
For example, the word “protest” will now get your account and activity monitored.

Suddenly Ubuntu doesn’t seem so terrible now, does it??

Ubuntu gang represent.