hobby-*
Uppsala, Sverige
Joined June 2009
- Tweets9.1K
- Following1.9K
- Followers666
- Likes12.1K
Tankar om gymnasielagendomarna
medium.com/@Fossey/tankar-om…
Hela det här är ju ett tecken på att deras modeller inte blir outtömligt bra på cybersäkerhet, så de behöver samla in mer träningsdata för möjlighet till små förbättringar. Dvs det förhåller sig inte som de sålt till allmänheten - ingen RL-outtömlig exponential improvement på g
Err… @OpenAI? Huh???
This is outrageous.
Daybreak Blue accounts with Advanced Account Security on individual accounts will share data for model training… even if that setting is disabled.
You just redeemed yourself after the usage reduction for Pro200 blunder. And now this?
Like I say… outrageous.
Nils Höglund retweeted
Calling it now.
AI is going to usher in a whole new era of software development. I’m calling it Software as a Service.
People will want to use these tools but they’ll realize they don’t want to spend the time to maintain and update them over time.
This will create a whole new category of businesses and entrepreneurs that can take on that task for businesses that would rather work on their core products.
AI is changing everything. This is a whole new paradigm of thinking about the way we interact with software.
AI-leverantörer borde krävas tillhandahålla, ev gratis, smarta modeller instruerade att försöka göra maximal skada i miljöerna de släpps in. Sedan borde IT-säkerhetsnormen vara att alltid köra sådana modeller i miljöer där AI kommer att verka innan man släpper in annan AI.
Låter spontant galet, men är egentligen sane IT-säkerhetsmässigt och seriösa organisationer kommer göra liknande i framtiden (oavsett om tillhandahålls gratis eller ej). Så tror kommer bli norm så småningom.
Nils Höglund retweeted
Heard of a top law firm completely cutting off Harvey and all API calls to Claude/OpenAI after they saw what openAI did with navier strokes
Now hosting everything locally with GPUs they own, running Kimi and deepseek
Think you’ll see a lot more of this going forward
Det är otroligt skadligt att OpenAI&Anthropic begränsar sina modeller inom säkerhet. När används vid vanlig kodning inför modellerna säkerhetsbuggar av misstag som de senare vägrar rätta. Som jag har sagt tidigare, AI-lagstiftning borde fokusera på förbjuda censur av modeller.
Är egentligen paradigmskiftet gällande IT-säkerhet i en värld med kapabla AI-modeller. Majoritet av organisationer har haft underliggande problem men inte behövt fixa för ingen har orkat lägga tid på att hacka just dem. Med AI-modeller kan hackare enklare automatisera.
Nils Höglund retweeted
DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017 is here!
Open weights on HuggingFace!
Let's go!!!!
Link: huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/D…
Varför följer inte den här ”sekretesstämpeln” på handlingen (som ÅM gjort?) OSL 5:5?
Nils Höglund retweeted
The classic case: you start with a weak idea. If you talk and think about it with others, you make progress to better ideas.
If you talk and think about it with AI, it dresses up your idea in economic jargon, contract theory etc., now you have the same bad idea, but it's expressed in enough jargon that it's a little harder to tell that it's a bad idea.
It also looks very impressive, look at all that economic logic! You feel like you're really progressing as an academic thinker and writer, but in fact you're in a much worse place than when you started. 4/
Nils Höglund retweeted
For all the AI safety people pushing for “independent evaluators” like METR and AISI, there’s already a term for this:
Nils Höglund retweeted
We were able to fine tune an open weight model (Qwen3.5-9B) on proprietary internal data at @coinbase, and it out performed frontier models, at much lower cost and speed, for a specialized task (fraud prevention in this case).
I think we'll see more of this pattern inside companies. The frontier models are amazing generalists. But increasingly you'll see specialist models out perform on more narrow tasks, either working on teams, or by themselves.
We're making it easy to fine tune models internally for our employees. We even have a skill for it in our internal harness that makes it easy to spin these up and start training them:
"/fine-tune-and-serve-llm I want to fine-tune Qwen for payments risk review. help me get started"
I imagine we'll have some backend services that could be replaced entirely by this new architecture.
Nils Höglund retweeted
Tao is completely missing the mark - what he's describing is actually completely standard for drug discovery. There are tons of drugs that have saved millions of lives without any person on Earth understanding fully the mechanisms of action that enabled them to do this.
Så proffsen byggt upp produktiva AI-system redan. Glöm Claude Code, OpenClaw eller andra osäkra amatör-setups.
Satya is right. The way to make SI safe is not to train it with a sense of self, its own moral philosophy, and permission to act as a conscientious objector. That’s the “alignment” approach and it magnifies the control problem.
The engineering approach that Satya describes is different: separate the supply of intelligence from authority over it. Surround non-deterministic models with deterministic controls, observability, privilege limits, logging, and the ability to always contain or shut them down. Treat models/agents like powerful insider risks, not moral patients whose psychological wellbeing is at stake.
As Satya points out, the most trustworthy system is the one that lets us trust the model the least — not the one that encourages the model to develop independent agency and grievances. Engineering safety is not the same thing as “alignment.”
Otroligt intressant hur dåligt matte-eliten accepterar AI-verkligheteb och hur de drar med ner yngre generationen och matematikcommunity
Nils Höglund retweeted
The good news is that AI agent security is a lot like insider threat. The bad news is everyone sucks at managing insider threats.
(Opinions on Microsoft aside, Satya’s new post is good)
Mmmm. Visst. Low hanging fruit my ass
Deepmind provided Alphafold as a brilliant free-to-use, open-source tool that greatly helps biologists being more productive and successful. This is a great example of an AI application beneficial to humanity.
Conversely, OpenAI went for a vicious, cynical blitz on low-hanging fruit proofs, leaving mathematicians to sort out the resulting mess over coming months, without any hope to get any credit for it, and they didn't even release the model they used. This is a great example of an AI application detrimental to humanity.