The fact that it is autocomplete, doesn't dismiss or minimize the threat though?
I am not sure how that link was made.
Good old ML, which is significantly simpler than LLMs, was capable of ensuring people would not be hired simply because of their names.
The fact that it is misaligned is also not being contended, if anything that contention is made easier to support.
When models are anthropomorphized intuitions of how humans behave end up driving discussion and ideas off track while being too attractive to avoid. This isn't helped when the terminology from the labs and other sources is "intelligence" "intent" and so on.
The link was made because many early uses of the phrase “it's just autocomplete” were in a context of denying that it's “intelligent” or that it “can think”. This in turn was generally used to downplay the concerns from AI safety experts that it could pose a threat to humankind, especially by pointing at its inability to count r’s in “strawberry” or its failure mode triggered uniquely by asking for a seahorse emoji. Most people don't seem to really grasp what we mean by “misalignment”.
I am not sure how that link was made.
Good old ML, which is significantly simpler than LLMs, was capable of ensuring people would not be hired simply because of their names.
The fact that it is misaligned is also not being contended, if anything that contention is made easier to support.
When models are anthropomorphized intuitions of how humans behave end up driving discussion and ideas off track while being too attractive to avoid. This isn't helped when the terminology from the labs and other sources is "intelligence" "intent" and so on.