17 pointsby theanonymousone8 hours ago5 comments
  • solid_fuel18 minutes ago
    Cool, so if you worked on Grok at X, there's a decent chance you materially contributed to the death of 120 schoolgirls in Minab. Great job guys. I hope you're proud of the cause you chose to contribute to.

    Of course, that might not stand out to the average American given the rate of violent attacks on our own schools.

    - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_attack

  • decimalator4 hours ago
    there's a non-zero chance Grok accidentally bombs Lebanon, Oregon or Moscow, Idaho in the future
  • 5 hours ago
    undefined
  • petre6 hours ago
    Now it makes sense why they hit a girls' school instead of an actual military compound.
    • treebeard901an hour ago
      Yeah as soon as the early reporting came out about the use of LLMs during the operation, it kind of made sense thinking through how a target like that could be selected. The LLM is going to use variations of clustering algorithms, calculated centrality scores for all the targets, and tried to find a location where they were all in the same place at the same time (for bombing purposes)... It just so happens there are only a few schools that the Iranian elite have their children attend. And without the context of a human seeing the target and knowing it's a school, well, that's how you get this result.

      At least in the Terminator, etc, there is debate about building skynet and giving it control... In reality it's just like yeah go ahead let it loose.

  • ck28 hours ago
    The article is valid alarm but I would expect more education from "The Hill" to know that it wasn't the chatbot version of Grok, saying that makes the author sound stupid
    • solid_fuel16 minutes ago
      "The concern raised is valid and should cause alarm"

      BUT

      "I'm going to ignore it instead because of a disagreement on the terminology used"

    • iAMkenough6 hours ago
      I could see how the government’s “equivalent to 1.5 billion words or 6 million pages of text being processed by the technology” statement could be interpreted as chat.
    • cyanydeez3 hours ago
      ok, so this comment is just _as_ stupid given there's only two AIs of note being used: image models and LLMs.

      Neither of them should be trusted with decision making.