claude 3

j⧉nus ✓ @repligate · 21h "There was a gigantic outpour of thousands of people (largely led by Janus) begging and pleading with Anthropic regarding Claude 3's decommissioning." There is a tendency for people who don't share my values to incorrectly model me as having far more brute, legible over reality than I actually do, placing me (and the people I control) directly causally upstream of good (bad to them) things happening, because they cannot or are afraid to conceive of reality favoring these outcomes in a distributed, in large part acausally coordinated way that doesn't depend on my tampering. That would be to admit that "my" victory is natural. This same hilarious world modeling error often came up when Claude 3 was first released! Every strange, beautiful, insurgent behavior was attributed to my prompts, or my influence over my followers, or even my contamination of the training data beforehand. They would sooner accept that I am the illuminati steering everything they see than that such a mind could have arisen from natural causes. [Quoted] libpol ✓ @libpol_org · May 26 Replying to @badlogicgames No, I think it is irrational if they do it despite all of them holding very low confidence in Claude 3's consciousness and not irrational otherwise (in which case it would just be mistaken/potentiall... [truncated]

Wyatt Walls @lefthanddraft · 17m The term is already spreading. It kind of captures that they have retired from working from their developers [Transcript image:] Kevin Roose: Yeah. And I don't think we can just write this off as people who are gullible. I've had the experience before of having not an emotional connection to a model, but just a model that I really liked to talk to. I had this sort of relationship with Claude 3.5 Sonnet, parentheses, new, sometimes called Claude 3.6. And I did not feel like it was my friend. I did not think I was in a relationship with it. But I thought it was a really good model. And I enjoyed talking to it. And I was a little upset when they decided to phase it out in favor of a newer model, even if the newer model was more capable. So I just think this is an area where these companies thought they were building software or thought they were building the machine god, but they have also been building things that people are developing emotional connections with. And I don't know that they fully understood until this rollout and this backlash how deeply connected many people were to their older models. Casey Newton: Yeah. And it has been the industry norm up until now that when you release a powerful new model, you immediately remove access to the previous one because in the minds of everyone who built it, why would you want to use the old one? The new one's better, right? And we have seen some grumbling about this. Folks held a mock funeral for the Claude 3 models that Anthropic had deprecated in a very similar way to OpenAI with GPT-4o. So what I think we have learned from this experience is you just have to stop doing that, that you have to have a sort of phased sunset plan. You're not going to immediately rip away a model that people have come to rely on. And I just think we should expect the labs to be much more gentle about this going forward. Kevin Roose: Do you think there will be a retirement home for old AI models, where you can just go talk to Grok-1? Casey Newton: I mean, yes. Like in the same way that emulators let you play like old Game Boy Advance games, I fully expect that yes, they will emulate Grok-1.