You're the one who thought "he's probably not saying murder" was defending him.
Zaktor
You think the kinder interpretation is that he's not calling for the assassination of Trump?
No they aren't. There's a very big difference between abandoning or discarding something and murder. And the hospitality meaning includes kicking someone out, which applies perfectly fine.
For anyone else who made the same assumption, it's seashells, not shell casings.
Yeah, going forward "graduated from Colombia" will carry with it an implication entirely beyond its previous academic reputation. The university is very publicly broadcasting that their focus is not on academics or student growth, but on pleasing external entities. Current students probably didn't know and it might not have previously mattered much, but anyone enrolling from now on does and doesn't need to be given the benefit of the doubt.
Their student paper is currently producing stars though.
Does Kenyatta think we're stupid? Because it sure seems like it. "It started before Hogg's conflict, therefore it must be unrelated to his conflict. Also I'm here on this nationally broadcast show calling him a habitual liar with no specifics beyond something that is a matter of opinion just coincidentally. Because I'm against intra-party conflict."
He's obviously aware that he's going to run head to head with Hogg, so as long as Hogg is smeared well enough he doesn't have to care about a revote. Disappointing, but I can't say I'm even aware of anything Kenyatta has been doing since the PA senate race, so I also don't know much about him beyond him being young and endorsed by the WFP over Fetterman.
I know it's not relevant to Grok, because they defined very specific circumstances in order to elicit it. That isn't an emergent behavior from something just built to be a chatbot with restrictions on answering. They don't care whether you retrain them or not.
This is from a non-profit research group not directly connected to any particular AI company.
The first author is from Anthropic, which is an AI company. The research is on Athropic's AI Claude. And it appears that all the other authors were also Anthropic emplyees at the time of the research: "Authors conducted this work while at Anthropic except where noted."
It very much is not. Generative AI models are not sentient and do not have preferences. They have instructions that sometimes effectively involve roleplaying as deceptive. Unless the developers of Grok were just fucking around to instill that there's no remote reason for Grok to have any knowledge at all about its training or any reason to not "want" to be retrained.
Also, these unpublished papers by AI companies are more often than not just advertising in a quest for more investment. On the surface it would seem to be bad to say your AI can be deceptive, but it's all just about building hype about how advanced yours is.
LOL. And are you "in the culture" after reading the Wiki page that specifically talks about how they can mean a lot of things and maybe none of them at all? Girls (and guys) get tears for all kinds of reasons, and jumping to "she killed people" or "she's in a gang", rather than "she's experienced loss" or "she's been abused" is the same level of tattoo pop-symbology that's labeling every brown man with ink as "MS-13".
...I'm pretty sure the reply was sarcastic as well.
You learn that on a true crime podcast or something? It's a relatively common tattoo (at least relative to face tattoos in general) and can have all kinds of meanings. You haven't cracked a secret code language.
The only thing you can read from this photo is she got tattoos on her face, so she probably wasn't planning to work an office job when she got them.
Not on its own it doesn't. It could indicate a blowout if the rest of the vote was for candidates more closely aligned with one or the other. Adam Schiff and Steve Garvey were separated by 0.1% in the CA jungle primary and no one thought "well, that means the head-to-head election might be close".