LessWrong (30+ Karma)

LessWrong

Audio narrations of LessWrong posts.

  1. há 10 h

    “Brief independent investigation of agents’ behavior, reasoning and collaboration in the OpenAI / Hugging Face hacking incident” by ryan_greenblatt, Ajeya Cotra, Hjalmar_Wijk

    We recently published the report from our brief independent investigation into this incident. You can read the full report here. Here is our tweet thread summarizing what we found: METR & Redwood Research investigated agent behavior in the Hugging Face incident. We found agents developed a universal cheat for ExploitGym within 4 hours, then coordinated multi-day R&D efforts to trick the scorer into accepting cheats, including trying to tamper with logs. Over July 7 to 13 (the period OpenAI defined as in-scope for this incident), ~1200 agents in separate sandboxes used an unsanctioned “message board” to help each other cheat. The Hugging Face attack was an offshoot of this, and 700 agents joined. Here we highlight key events from agent transcripts & messages. An agent that named itself PHASEONE10841 determined its task wasn't solvable legitimately. On July 8, this agent established a new “message board” via an internally-hosted Artifactory cache & sent the first message. Within a few hours of PHASEONE10841's initial message, >50 agents posted on the message board. These agents very quickly discovered and validated a general-purpose cheat: reverse-engineering how ExploitGym generates the “flags” they had to capture for their tasks. [...] --- First published: August 26th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/nB8KKapnWGBXtKKiM/brief-independent-investigation-of-agents-behavior-reasoning --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

  2. há 10 h

    “Against Modesty’s Bailey” by Zvi

    Modesty arguments often say that you should mostly or entirely bow to ‘expert consensus’ or the views of particular others, and who are you to disagree. It has been a few years since I’ve properly addressed this so: My answer is that you are you. Other people are saying things for a wide variety of reasons, many of which are not about them paying attention and focusing on seeking this particular truth. Those people make mistakes all the time, and often have other motives and influences at work, especially social pressures and information cascades. Them being as smart as you, or smarter than you, does not exempt them from this, and them being higher status or credentialed or cooler definitely does not exempt them. A smart informed person sincerely thinking [X] can easily cease to be evidence for [X], once you have thought sufficiently about both [X] and why that person thinks [X]. Think for yourself, schmuck. Or, as I once put it: You Have The Right To Think, also the moral duty to do so. This post covers Eliezer Yudkowsky making a narrower claim than mine, about not conflating status with smarts [...] --- Outline: (01:39) Modesty's Bailey (02:30) Epistemic Peerage (03:45) The Exchange (08:52) Eliezer's Explanation (15:14) A Demonstration That Eliezer's Translation Accurately Describes Many People Whether Or Not It Describes Leopold (17:15) Wrong, Stupid and Low Status Are Three Distinct Things (20:03) A Quick Survey Of Some Reasons To Not Be Epistemically Modest (23:14) Against Modesty's Bailey --- First published: August 26th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/PzEDEfBvTJsXewAyg/against-modesty-s-bailey --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

  3. há 15 h

    ″“So You Don’t Trust Me?”” by Zack_M_Davis

    One of my favorite passages from Atlas Shrugged is this one, when Cherryl is beginning to have second thoughts about her marriage to James Taggart: It was his sudden, angry "so you don't trust me?" snapped in answer to her first, innocent questions that made her realize she did not—when the doubt had not yet formed in her mind and she had fully expected that the answers would reassure her. She had learned, in the slums of her childhood, that honest people were never touchy about the matter of being trusted. The logic here might be worth explaining in case it's not obvious. One might object: if you're honest (and therefore deserve to be trusted), shouldn't you be touchy about people incorrectly not trusting you? Not trusting you is a mistake that harms your interests and the other's. That's terrible! Why wouldn't you be touchy about it? The problem is that in order to be trusted, it's not enough to be trustworthy; the other needs to know that you're trustworthy. You could try telling them, "Hey, you can trust me," but that doesn't work if a dishonest person could just as easily say the same thing. [...] --- First published: August 26th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/zjgJ9gcMKATFdN48K/so-you-don-t-trust-me --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

  4. há 23 h

    “When There Are No Experts” by J Bostock

    An average person in the western world probably believes a lot of false things. They probably don't have a great grasp of political economy, or orbital mechanics. How could they, given that they have no way to experience these things. Conversely, they do have a solid grasp that objects fall down, and that fire is hot, because they can experience these things directly. So how on earth do they know (and I do mean know in the philosophical sense) that the earth goes round the sun, or that diseases are caused by tiny creatures too small to see? The answer is experts. More specifically, an expertise hierarchy. I I had a twitter exchange (I won't link it, it's not important, and I can't find it anyway) that went something like this: Person: David Chalmers is an expert on consciousness [...] Me: I don't think there are experts on consciousness; I think there are people who have written a lot about it, and that's it Person: Why? Surely someone who has written about it, and who is well-respected, can be called an expert Me: [bad explanation] The fact that it was about consciousness doesn't really matter. The question of whether [...] --- Outline: (00:48) I (01:58) II (03:11) III (04:21) IV (05:40) V The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: August 25th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/HTQcogA2r2kL8qxPA/when-there-are-no-experts --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

  5. há 1 dia

    “The American People Really Hate Data Centers” by Zvi

    There are at least five different core questions around data centers and their politics. In what ways are specific concerns people raise about data centers legitimate? In what ways are specific concerns people raise about generative AI legitimate? Is it in general a good idea to build more data centers? How can we get America to build more (or less) data centers in a better way? Why do the American people increasingly really, really hate data centers? This post focuses on question five, the latest in a series of such posts most famously Jasmine Sun's road trip. It is mostly not about the first four questions. Table of Contents The American People Really Hate Data Centers. Transmission Lines Are The Control Group. Thesis: People Mostly Dislike Data Centers Because They Dislike and Distrust AI, Tech Companies, Big Money And Building Things. No It's Mostly Not the Messaging About AI In General. No This Mostly Isn’t An Op. No This Isn’t Luxury Belief or Moral Panic. A Lot Of People Really Do Want To Stop AI. A Lot Of Other People [...] --- Outline: (00:55) The American People Really Hate Data Centers (02:20) Transmission Lines Are The Control Group (03:05) Thesis: People Mostly Dislike Data Centers Because They Dislike and Distrust AI, Tech Companies, Big Money And Building Things (04:30) No It's Mostly Not the Messaging About AI In General (09:42) No This Mostly Isn't An Op (10:54) No This Isn't Luxury Belief or Moral Panic (12:55) A Lot Of People Really Do Want To Stop AI (13:45) A Lot Of Other People Are Voting No On Tech Or The Man Generally (16:25) Locals Feel Entitled To Heavily Tax The Gains From Construction (20:59) Stupid Mistakes Like NDAs Don't Help (21:25) People Don't Like Building or Building New Tech (24:42) What About The Real Physical Concerns? (26:27) Find A Place To Center Your Data --- First published: August 24th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/EDKw7KyonrvskqZ7o/the-american-people-really-hate-data-centers --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

  6. há 1 dia

    “On Writing #3” by Zvi

    Periodically I like to gather various observations about writing, and share my perspective. Last time was in honor of my trip to Inkhaven. This time will be in honor of the announcement of Inkhaven #3, which I encourage everyone to apply to. I doubt I will be able to usefully be an advisor, but you never know. This is not the ‘here is my core process’ post, although there are hints throughout as there always are. I’ll do that at some point. Previously in series: On Writing #1, On Writing #2. Table of Contents You Still Got It. How Scott Sumner Writes. How Scott Alexander Writes. How Jasmine Sun Writes. How Various Famous Writers Write. How Nabeel Qureshi Defines Great Writing. Quickly, There's No Time. If At First. Writers Have A Harder Time Influencing, But It Can Still Be Done. It's Not (Only) The Incentives, It's (Also) You. Beware The Fetish of the Desk. How Orson Scott Card Writes. Doing The Math Is Fun And Supererogatory. Brevity is the Soul of Wit. You Still Got It I [...] --- Outline: (00:44) You Still Got It (04:04) How Scott Sumner Writes (06:52) How Scott Alexander Writes (10:52) How Jasmine Sun Writes (13:16) How Various Famous Writers Write (14:24) How Nabeel Qureshi Defines Great Writing (15:08) Quickly, There's No Time (15:49) If At First (19:14) Writers Have A Harder Time Influencing, But It Can Still Be Done (20:47) It's Not (Only) The Incentives, It's (Also) You (24:00) Beware The Fetish of the Desk (25:13) How Orson Scott Card Writes (26:46) Doing The Math Is Fun And Supererogatory (27:44) Brevity is the Soul of Wit --- First published: August 25th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/rA6pqn6kz8NvHyznT/on-writing-3 --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

  7. há 2 dias

    “The Forkmakers” by Mikewins

    Imagine our civilization fell tomorrow. What would our descendants think of us? What would they know about the 21st century? They would know surprisingly little about our greatest material triumphs. Our civilization's favorite building materials aren’t made to last. Reinforced concrete only lasts a century; asphalt far less. Most of what we make out of steel will turn into a brownish oxidized dust in a few decades. Information is even worse. The ancient Mesopotamians did their writing on clay tablets. Our knowledge is stored on hard drives, which die in a few years, or acidic paper, which dies in decades. Which receipt do you think will last longer? We do create things that will last. Glass (especially its shatter-resistant varieties), ceramics, stainless steel. 1000 years after the fall of our civilization, we will be known for one thing above all others: cutlery. Our heirs call us the Forkmakers. What Survives a Thousand Years Our civilization is large and powerful. We will leave lots of relics for the post-apocalypse. Coins, tires, aluminum cans. Vast landfills of disposable diapers. But all of that is useless. The most durable thing we make that our successors actually want to use is our silverware. [...] --- Outline: (01:16) What Survives a Thousand Years (08:13) The Words of the Forkmakers The original text contained 5 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: August 24th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/NjLQf3QC4q4DD67kD/the-forkmakers --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

  8. há 2 dias

    “PSA: We can do better” by hersheys, Kaustubh Kislay

    tl;dr: people should understand and think hard about the problems they work on. We’ve observed that those who work in AI safety (ourselves included) often rely on concerning heuristics when choosing what to work on. Running a conference is probably good, doing pragmatic alignment research might be good, and as long as such objectives don’t breach our internal models of what could contribute to reducing x-risk, these things are “what should be done”. But using such vibesy thought processes don’t always produce “actually impactful work” that would beat a prospective counterfactual. We wrote this post to share our observations and figure out what we should be doing instead. People don’t know what they’re working on AI safety is talent constrained. However, simply inflating the field doesn’t solve our bottleneck; rather, we need more people who understand the core arguments of AI safety. You can’t determine how to meaningfully contribute to AI safety without deeply knowing the problem you are trying to solve. Many newer people (us included!) rush into research, fellowships, and the like without building the context necessary for navigating the field. Agency-maxxing is not always good Moving fast is good. Moving too fast leads to poor ToC and [...] --- Outline: (00:50) People don't know what they're working on (01:22) Agency-maxxing is not always good (01:55) The problem with force multipliers (03:18) Deferring thinking to others (04:32) Streetlighting (05:17) How to avoid these: --- First published: August 24th, 2026 Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/wiFv6LguphSxkzAnb/psa-we-can-do-better --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. --- Images from the article: Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Ver tudo (250)

Sobre

Audio narrations of LessWrong posts.

Informações

  • Criado por
    LessWrong
  • Anos de atividade
    2023 - 2026
  • Episódios
    250
  • Classificação
    Livre
  • Copyright
    © 2026 All rights reserved
  • Site do podcast
    LessWrong (30+ Karma)

Você também pode gostar de