I think this is a really interesting, well-written, topical piece of creative writing, anyone with a free hour or so should give it a read!
It reminded me of Pluribus and Armored Core VI, fascinatingly enough as they both feature (spoiler!) AIs/entities that appear innocuous but may have more sinister motives (in Armored Core it's a more foregone conclusion).
I don't think it's doomerism but rather a creative extrapolation of current worries about AI labs allowing agents to break containment because of their poor sandboxing.
What's also interesting (although more of a meta-comment) is the dichotomy between how users on Lesswrong and here have completely different options on it. In either case, it's nice and was worth my time, even though I don't have anything more substantiative to say.
I think that's it really, the fact that someone else made it. Sometimes we make things for ourselves that lean perhaps on the _functional_ side, (tools, food...) that we would never want served to us. And AI just exacerbates this. I do wonder why that is though.
Perhaps about the quality of the comments. In my opinion it's not really that bad but reddit-style comments are often cheap shots that are slightly off topic, some of which I see present here
There are many differences IMO. Moderators, for instance, censor a ton on reddit; but the UI is also different. I much preferred old.reddit.com over both the new reddit (which is utter trash) and hackernews (which is simple, but also ... strange and awkward, much more confusing than old.reddit.com - and I hate the fact that after like 5 comments, I get locked out for hours before I can make more comments, that is the worst decision hackernews ever made).
"Privacy#
All these models are hosted in the US. Providers follow a zero-retention policy and do not use your data for model training, with the following exceptions:
Big Pickle: During its free period, collected data may be used to improve the model.
DeepSeek V4 Flash Free: During its free period, collected data may be used to improve the model.
MiMo-V2.5 Free: During its free period, collected data may be used to improve the model.
Laguna S 2.1 Free: During its free period, collected data may be used to improve the model.
Ling-3.0-tiny Free: During its free period, collected data may be used to improve the model.
LongCat-2.0 Free: During its free period, collected data may be used to improve the model.
North Mini Code Free: During its free period, collected data may be retained and used to improve the model. Do not submit personal or confidential data. See the provider’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Nemotron 3 Ultra Free (NVIDIA free endpoints): Trial use only — do not submit personal or confidential data. Your use is logged for security purposes and to improve NVIDIA products and services. The logged session data for improvement purposes is not linked to your identity or any persistent identifier. For more information about data processing practices, see the Privacy Policy. By interacting with this endpoint, you consent to the collection, recording, and use of such information and the NVIDIA API Trial Terms of Service."
It reminded me of Pluribus and Armored Core VI, fascinatingly enough as they both feature (spoiler!) AIs/entities that appear innocuous but may have more sinister motives (in Armored Core it's a more foregone conclusion).
I don't think it's doomerism but rather a creative extrapolation of current worries about AI labs allowing agents to break containment because of their poor sandboxing.
What's also interesting (although more of a meta-comment) is the dichotomy between how users on Lesswrong and here have completely different options on it. In either case, it's nice and was worth my time, even though I don't have anything more substantiative to say.
reply