Anthropic have a new scary campfire story on why everything they work on is evil and out to get you! This one is called “AI models may be capable of self-replicating without access to a datacenter.” Here’s the headline claim: [Anthropic]
Our experiments suggest that small AI models may be months away from being capable enough to self-replicate on commercial internet-of-things (IoT) devices, like smart ovens and off-brand Android TV boxes.
… If small models improve at their historical rate, they’ll match this capability level by the end of this year.
The end of this year.
The paper constructs a scenario. This is otherwise known as making up a sci-fi story about killer robots, then telling the incredibly credulous press that this can happen in the next two months, and then they print it as-is.
Here’s Joseph Menn at the Guardian swallowing this tall tale, hook, line, and sinker: [Guardian]
the red team, as such internal testers are called, said it created a malicious AI program that spread autonomously through internet-connected “smart” televisions and could do the same inside other ordinary devices.
No they did not! The team made up a story about a program that might do that if a hundred other things that don’t exist come true!
Menn also compared this scenario to Harry Potter, because of course he did. Read another book!
Menn spoke to an “expert” who told him:
What differentiates AI worms from typical reproducing viruses is that AI models can learn as they go.
Chatbot models do not learn as they go! That’s why the AI vendors spend a fortune on training and post-training!
Anthropic’s scenario posits an AI network worm — a self-replicating program.
We’ve had computer worms since 1971. Someone else (not Anthropic) built an AI-based worm earlier this year and tested it on an isolated network. This did not propagate the model itself, because chatbot models are quite big. Instead, the test worm took over smaller machines it had access to and ran tiny models on them. [arXiv, PDF]
Anthropic took this earlier experiment and says it means a whole model “could” copy itself from machine to machine. This means it “could” set up a botnet of TV set-top boxes! And spread all by itself! You can’t prove it won’t!
They did run a small model on a network of 15 Android set-top boxes. It ran at a blistering 0.39 tokens per second.
There are a few other steps that would need to be shown for the threat to hold. The bot has to scan the wider internet. It needs to hack into the set-top box. This has to be done with their tiny model, at less than a token per second. Then it has to copy itself.
The researchers don’t bother testing if any of these work. They just say “not our focus.”
It is true that embedded boxes have notoriously awful security. There have been some huge botnets on these insecure boxes. Those botnets run actual code, which is quite a bit smaller and faster.
Those botnets existing does not let you handwave how your evil chatbot could totally do that for sure.
If you can create a model that’s smart enough to hack tiny embedded hardware while it’s running on tiny embedded hardware, and if it can figure out how to hack new small boxes, and if it can do all of this without the researchers helping it along at every stumble, like all the previous AI hacking researchers did … then sure. But you can’t just assume any of that.
Anthropic says “could” a lot in this paper. “Could” and “might” and even “will” are all words that mean “doesn’t”. “Could” is not enough.
And they admit that “doesn’t” is the word for how this works: [Al Jazeera]
Although no current AI model proved to be both powerful and small enough to self-replicate reliably on a smart TV used in testing,
Much like no current slingshot has proven elastic enough to fire a space shuttle. Obviously we just have to scale up.
The models would only have to shrink by 99% and run with a thousandth of the data centre compute they’re made for while still being able to hack into arbitrary gadgets and come up with new hacks. Autonomously. And they’d have to do all of this by the distant magical future era of the end of 2026.
But maybe I’m wrong. Show me! You’ve got ten weeks.
This paper is marketing. Not to you and me, but to credulous government regulators. The current US administration already believes the chatbot is the magical truth machine, and they think Anthropic has the best magical truth machine.
This paper is a message to say: regulate AI. Make rules so only the huge vendors like us can comply. Then the AI can convert NASA to use giant slingshots.




