Refereeing a public academic spat about what LLMs really do
After explaining how preference training reshapes a model, it referees a philosophers argument, naming which rhetorical moves fail and which point lands.
Related
Picking apart Anthropic's raised bar for bioweapon risk thresholds
A sharp rebuttal argues Anthropic's revised CBRN safety threshold quietly raised the bar and may miss diffuse, aggregate uplift from many experts.
A Sharp Rebuttal to an AI Hype Essay's Aggressive Timelines
A detailed critique of a viral essay predicting rapid white-collar job loss from AI, weighing where its urgency is earned and where confidence outruns evidence.
AI peer reviewers disagree wildly, all while claiming 100% sure
A data dive into an AI paper-review dataset finds reviewer bots that never agree with humans, then a second AI stress-tests and corrects the first analysis.
Is Gary Marcus 'plainly and clownishly wrong' about AI
Who is Gary Marcus, and is he 'plainly and clownishly wrong'? A layered answer separates his prediction track record from his underlying thesis.