Comment by chrisra
8 days ago
I don't know if inspection would be practical. How do you inspect the weights for an intentionally hidden trigger that writes malware?
8 days ago
I don't know if inspection would be practical. How do you inspect the weights for an intentionally hidden trigger that writes malware?
You don't. You handle it the same way you handle security holes which every LLM (including "safe" American ones) will put in your software sooner or later -- by understanding and reviewing the output.
Glad someone is pointing this out here on this community. I keep reading about people "solving" the problem of LLMs outputting too much code that's hard to review by not doing human review at all!
You can do that for non-critical code. But code has a habit of being repurposed and sooner or later your non-critical original is used in a very critical application.
I don't have the answer to that, my simple solution to this problem is not to trust anything a model ever writes and so far that strategy has worked very well.
Why write that comment in the first place when you know that inspection of model weights is not a thing though?
Inspection of model weights is a thing. But that thing is out of my wheelhouse so I do the next best which is to judge the output.
5 replies →