as a general case yes, people like things more the more times they hear about them.

trump constantly doing annoying stuff for instance, was good for him getting elected.

visibility correlates positively with likeability

> trump constantly doing annoying stuff for instance, was good for him getting elected.

And I remember when just yelling on stage got you disqualified from running for president (Dean scream)

Now, you can chant fascist rhetoric on campaign, and the MAGAts eat it up.

How times and decorum change.

id guess the arguments you had to convince non-existent readers also helped make a stronger case to the electeds?

they can also put them in better places, vs trying to arbitrage expensive electricity costs and various US corruption thats built more around paying people off than getting things done

DMCA is the really obvious one.

torrenting all the books is making an unauthorized copy

there is a rogue agent - openai and the whole management chain from researcher to sama.

theres no separate agent, which is the point. the program might look like it, but that is an illusion of the interface. the llm produces text, and the harness executes commands based on text, based on what the human researcher included as things that can be executed

i think its objectionable because the agent is doing what its told to do, using the harness they built for it.

like, they are purposefully giving it specific tools to go do bad behaviour with, and the starting tasks involve making it clear that the bad behaviour is ok.

openai also is the one with the real agency, not its agents. they are running the code polling the model, doing the inferencing, and ultimately making those tools calls.

these tests arent running themselves; openai dedicated hosts, budget, GPUs, researchers, to them. Even in a recursive self improvement situation, openai still has that physical control over resources and the choice on whether to run that improvement script or not.

id describe that they have out of control researchers more than agents, but also their whole business model seems to be about being out of control. This was clear beforehand given how the datasets involve the largest scale copyright infringement ever seen. The corporation itself is whats out of control, and should be dissolved with its c suite, major investors and researchers put behind bars.

hacking only when you roll snake eyes isnt a liability shield

> The entire reason the bots were targeting this site is that it had some of the data they'd been tasked with finding.

so openai specifically tasked the agents with meddling in US government websites?

id say tasking them with getting data from there as swapping from negligence to malice.

No. They tasked them with answering questions by retrieving data from public sources. This obviously requires internet access. So the incredulity about "how could they fail to block internet access" is just inane. That was the task.

They did not task the agents with hacking into systems. Not monitoring for that was a mistake, but maybe a forgivable one the first time around. The subsequent coverups are inexcusable.

Usually also, and more so nowadays, a few of the public sources of data left, even after the recent USGov intention of defund and close as much of them as possible, im guessing would be precisely, government websites!

early plan mode would just refuse to make edits at all

thats a feature flag you can gurn on still

i find astra's every other message is a small plan, and i have to confirm for it to go