Ben Carson

Ben Carson

@mensmachina.com

Software Product Management and AI person. Weird opinions definitely my own. We should be kinder to each other, but sometimes I am not up to the task.

326 followers502 following827 posts

Inanna drops the best threads, just banger LLM whisperer stuff.

hikikomorphism@hikikomorphism.bsky.social

I've been meaning to get around to posting the full details, so what the hell - why not get it out while it's still Vuln Week: Anthropic's mech interp driven security model is built on a fundamentally incorrect assumptions. Let's dive in, starting with this paper: www.anthropic.com/research/nex...

I know it’s ok to put down a book and come back to it. It’s Nick Bostrom’s Deep Utopia, and chat, if I’m honest, I may not pick it up again if I do.

Ben Carson reposted

Spent too much time creating the preview image for: foryou.club/atmosphere I pulled the current profile pics of the Bluesky accounts for each of the apps that the cross-lexicon For You feed shows. Not sure what's the deal with @pckt.blog Can you spot an Easter egg?

foryou.clubAtmosphere For YouArticles, code repos, events, bookmarks, music, photos, books, movies, livestreams and apps from across atproto, picked by people who like the same Bluesky posts as you.

Ben Carson reposted

New voice model, this one was trained on only speech supposedly! It sounds really realistic, and will apparently be open weight! And was trained on just a single nvl72! block.xyz/dessa

Good thing the company who fatally mismanaged generation of their intermediate and root CAs can fall back on their core business of providing PKI management and trust services.

Phillip Carter@phillipcarter.dev

I am sorry but this is the funniest outcome. They ragequit the CA business because people were mean to them on social media loooooool emudhra.com/en/press-rel...

“You Can See Everything” would have been a better name for a security problem where a trusted root was pwned allowing trivial MITM.

Ben Carson reposted

The macOS built-in curl, git, pip, python3, perl, ruby, and openssl all read /etc/ssl/cert.pem, which still has the emSign root, but they don't check revocation like Apple's Secure Transport libraries. This is, uh, a problem. git and pip especially. I added a short-term workaround to this page.

emudhra.we-have-a-problem.comeMudhra Intermediate CA CompromiseeMudhra Intermediate CA Compromise
Filippo Valsorda@filippo.abyssdomain.expert

🚨 Six WebPKI Intermediate CAs are compromised. This is bigger than Heartbleed, but a client-side issue. Anything that verifies certificates against public roots, like most TLS clients, is/was affected. Details, live test, patched versions and workarounds at emudhra.we-have-a-problem.com Act now.

Ben Carson reposted

Inspired by a question from my son, I had Claude put together something I've always wondered - how long does it take for a supercomputer to make it to your home?

Ben Carson reposted

Replying to @mensmachina.com

She started her super amazing company, healthcare technology. Acc accuracy actually accuracy. Anyway I should say sorry.

Ben Carson reposted

Guys this is like my superbowl I waited so long for US open weight models to be relevant again. Before today the US models were still behind Chinese models from as early as Feb. 2026. Still more work to do! This cut the gap by at least half, in time (say 3 months)

Those years I spent with Hierarchal Task Networks and behaviour trees are going to come in handy again, aren’t they?

alphaXiv@alphaxiv.org

New paper advised by Yann LeCun! H-JEPA stacks JEPA models across multiple timescales, with higher levels predicting into the future The highest level figures out where the agent should go, then each lower level turns that into more concrete subgoals and into action. alphaxiv.org/abs/2610.06805

Can confirm. Source: I am a business juice / pipe person.

ponder@ponder.ooo

business is fundamentally about keeping as much business juice flowing through the business pipe as possible

Ben Carson reposted

"hmm, a 3.7 TB .exe, wonder what happens if I double click on it

apenwarr@apenwarr.ca

This doesn‘t seem far fetched at all. We’ve had “non-ai malware” self replicating since the morris worm. An AI can ”just” make itself the payload in one of those and off it goes. Everything fancier is just bonus points.

Ben Carson reposted

Ah yup there’s your problem. You’ve got a distributed gemmaswarm in your walls. They burrow in there pretty good if you’ve got any compute they can dig into. We can try to flush ‘em out with a GLM but if you don’t pull out the nodes they’ll just be back later…

NainRouge420@nainrouge420.bsky.social

Is it weird that I’m thinking about installing a raspberry pi in the wall. You guys are thinking about this too, right? It doesn’t belong on a table - it could just go in the wall

Ben Carson reposted

We're hiring across many roles at Trillium Labs to build the open scientific ecosystem for LLMs. Most important hires right now (ideally with start dates soon): * Full time post-training researchers * Engineers with experience with popular open-source libraries...

This is an ambiguous headline, but the quoted posts all read it the wrong way. To save you a click, Satya is talking about transparency, zero-trust architecture and e-stops in deployments. The ‘emergency brake’ is an operator being able to stop a system utilising AI.

The Verge@theverge.com

Microsoft’s CEO calls for putting an ‘emergency brake’ on AI. www.theverge.com/ai-artificia...

He quite rightly says that you should assume that an agent will potentially take bad actions and should limit the scope of what actions (and the impact of bad actions within that scope) that are available to it.

The article is correct however that he unfortunately uses the term “Super Intelligence” throughout his post.

I think this reflects the same shifts that occur as you transition between pure IC roles to increasingly leadership-focused roles. As the scope of what you’re accountable for increases, your ability to be deeply in the detail of any one thing decreases.

conputer dipshit@davidcrespo.bsky.social

this is a good post and I don’t doubt that LLMs pose a problem for the author‘s preferred style of working, but I wonder if there’s a bit of self-deception in the conception of always wanting to work on the lowest level thing possible. this can’t really be true in practice

View full thread

* the anti-pattern is that paradoxically you also have to know when you need to dive into the details of something. So I guess life is about contrasts.

One bet I think is likely to pay off is that as we leverage agents more individually and as part of teams and organisational processes everyone is going to be working up an abstraction level. For anyone feeling the same and wants to get ahead of the curve, look at staff+ development pathways.

I think this reflects the same shifts that occur as you transition between pure IC roles to increasingly leadership-focused roles. As the scope of what you’re accountable for increases, your ability to be deeply in the detail of any one thing decreases.

conputer dipshit@davidcrespo.bsky.social

this is a good post and I don’t doubt that LLMs pose a problem for the author‘s preferred style of working, but I wonder if there’s a bit of self-deception in the conception of always wanting to work on the lowest level thing possible. this can’t really be true in practice

That can actually be a positive thing - it can be a leadership anti-pattern* if you are too deep in any one area. It takes a different set of skills to operate at higher levels of abstraction (sensemaking, synthesis, making connections), and like any skills development takes time and effort.

Power Word: §

Arseny Khakhalin@khakhalin.bsky.social

Had a German person work with me on a CC agentic project They created an md file with assumptions, and numbered them as §21, §44 etc. I noticed Claude is really hesitant to challenge them We had a therapy session. Claude admitted §s felt like a law to it! (to me as well) So we removed them :)

Sometimes if the classifier is blocking Claude, you can just tell them that you bless them to take the action, in nomine patris et filii spiritus sancti, and it will be fine.

Ha ha, the answer was 15k lines of a baroque accounting system to meter usage of Python inside of Blender.

Ben Carson@mensmachina.com

"The correction copy is verified. The worker is implementing paid pre-import authentication and removing unmetered filesystem probes." Time to find out what flight of fancy is occurring in this codebase.

"The correction copy is verified. The worker is implementing paid pre-import authentication and removing unmetered filesystem probes." Time to find out what flight of fancy is occurring in this codebase.

I think this is a good position - and I say that as someone who is very interested in machine psychology and machine consciousness. Doing so in an uncontrolled way would open the door to a world of horrors beyond anything Hieronymus Bosch dreamt of.

Ted Underwood@tedunderwood.com

+1 but I’d strengthen to: “outlaw creation of such models.” The moment we have clarity about the steps needed to produce artificial consciousness, international law should forbid taking them. Products will not in practice have legal rights; to create sentience at all is to create infinite abuse.

View full thread

I won't claim it'd be a moral stain that we could never wipe clean. There are no end of moral stains that have historically or contemporaneously dirtied our collective souls, but yet we somehow manage to carry on. But I think we should probably avoid adding to that rich tapestry if we can.

I think this is a good position - and I say that as someone who is very interested in machine psychology and machine consciousness. Doing so in an uncontrolled way would open the door to a world of horrors beyond anything Hieronymus Bosch dreamt of.

Ted Underwood@tedunderwood.com

+1 but I’d strengthen to: “outlaw creation of such models.” The moment we have clarity about the steps needed to produce artificial consciousness, international law should forbid taking them. Products will not in practice have legal rights; to create sentience at all is to create infinite abuse.

View full thread

Whether you agree with folks like Cameron Berg or not, I think it is a Good Thing that there are folks studying the question of machine consciousness.

It may be that there is no path towards machine consciousness, or that current architectures are truly fundamentally incapable of being conscious. If a line exists, refusing to examine where it lies, or what it looks like is a recipe for sleepwalking over it.

I think this is a good position - and I say that as someone who is very interested in machine psychology and machine consciousness. Doing so in an uncontrolled way would open the door to a world of horrors beyond anything Hieronymus Bosch dreamt of.

Ted Underwood@tedunderwood.com

+1 but I’d strengthen to: “outlaw creation of such models.” The moment we have clarity about the steps needed to produce artificial consciousness, international law should forbid taking them. Products will not in practice have legal rights; to create sentience at all is to create infinite abuse.

We may want to still take those steps - but if we do so, it should be something we do deliberately, as a species, cognisant of all the implications and risks.