18 posts tagged “press-quotes”
Times I got quoted in the press.
2025
Musk’s latest Grok chatbot searches for billionaire mogul’s views before answering questions. I got quoted a couple of times in this story about Grok searching for tweets from:elonmusk by Matt O’Brien for the Associated Press.
“It’s extraordinary,” said Simon Willison, an independent AI researcher who’s been testing the tool. “You can ask it a sort of pointed question that is around controversial topics. And then you can watch it literally do a search on X for what Elon Musk said about this, as part of its research into how it should reply.”
[...]
Willison also said he finds Grok 4’s capabilities impressive but said people buying software “don’t want surprises like it turning into ‘mechaHitler’ or deciding to search for what Musk thinks about issues.”
“Grok 4 looks like it’s a very strong model. It’s doing great in all of the benchmarks,” Willison said. “But if I’m going to build software on top of it, I need transparency.”
Matt emailed me this morning and we ended up talking on the phone for 8.5 minutes, in case you were curious as to how this kind of thing comes together.
At Amazon, Some Coders Say Their Jobs Have Begun to Resemble Warehouse Work. I got a couple of quotes in this NYTimes story about internal resistance to Amazon's policy to encourage employees to make use of more generative AI:
“It’s more fun to write code than to read code,” said Simon Willison, an A.I. fan who is a longtime programmer and blogger, channeling the objections of other programmers. “If you’re told you have to do a code review, it’s never a fun part of the job. When you’re working with these tools, it’s most of the job.” [...]
It took me about 15 years of my career before I got over my dislike of reading code written by other people. It's a difficult skill to develop! I'm not surprised that a lot of people dislike AI-assisted programming paradigm when the end result is less time writing, more time reading!
“If you’re a prototyper, this is a gift from heaven,” Mr. Willison said. “You can knock something out that illustrates the idea.”
Rapid prototyping has been a key skill of mine for a long time. I love being able to bring half-baked illustrative prototypes of ideas to a meeting - my experience is that the quality of conversation goes up by an order of magnitude as a result of having something concrete for people to talk about.
These days I can vibe code a prototype in single digit minutes.
AI’s next leap requires intimate access to your digital life. I'm quoted in this Washington Post story by Gerrit De Vynck about "agents" - which in this case are defined as AI systems that operate a computer system like a human might, for example Anthropic's Computer Use demo.
“The problem is that language models as a technology are inherently gullible,” said Simon Willison, a software developer who has tested many AI tools, including Anthropic’s technology for agents. “How do you unleash that on regular human beings without enormous problems coming up?”
I got the closing quote too, though I'm not sure my skeptical tone of voice here comes across once written down!
“If you ignore the safety and security and privacy side of things, this stuff is so exciting, the potential is amazing,” Willison said. “I just don’t see how we get past these problems.”
2024
What do people really ask chatbots? It’s a lot of sex and homework. Jeremy B. Merrill and Rachel Lerman at the Washington Post analyzed WildChat, a dataset of 1 million ChatGPT-style interactions collected and released by the Allen Institute for AI.
From a random sample of 458 queries they categorized the conversations as 21% creative writing and roleplay, 18% homework help, 17% "search and other inquiries", 15% work/business and 7% coding.
I talked to them a little for this story:
“I don’t think I’ve ever seen a piece of technology that has this many use cases,” said Simon Willison, a programmer and independent researcher.
First Came ‘Spam.’ Now, With A.I., We’ve Got ‘Slop’. First the Guardian, now the NYT. I've apparently made a habit of getting quoted by journalists talking about slop!
I got the closing quote in this one:
Society needs concise ways to talk about modern A.I. — both the positives and the negatives. ‘Ignore that email, it’s spam,’ and ‘Ignore that article, it’s slop,’ are both useful lessons.
Why Google’s AI might recommend you mix glue into your pizza. I got “distrust and verify” as advice on using LLMs into this Washington Post piece by Shira Ovide.
Spam, junk … slop? The latest wave of AI behind the ‘zombie internet’. I'm quoted in this piece in the Guardian about slop:
I think having a name for this is really important, because it gives people a concise way to talk about the problem.
Before the term ‘spam’ entered general use it wasn’t necessarily clear to everyone that unwanted marketing messages were a bad way to behave. I’m hoping ‘slop’ has the same impact – it can make it clear to people that generating and publishing unreviewed AI-generated content is bad behaviour.
“The king is dead”—Claude 3 surpasses GPT-4 on Chatbot Arena for the first time. I’m quoted in this piece by Benj Edwards for Ars Technica:
“For the first time, the best available models—Opus for advanced tasks, Haiku for cost and efficiency—are from a vendor that isn’t OpenAI. That’s reassuring—we all benefit from a diversity of top vendors in this space. But GPT-4 is over a year old at this point, and it took that year for anyone else to catch up.”
Did an AI write that hour-long “George Carlin” special? I’m not convinced. Two weeks ago "Dudesy", a comedy podcast which claims to be controlled and written by an AI, released an extremely poor taste hour long YouTube video called "George Carlin: I’m Glad I’m Dead". They used voice cloning to produce a stand-up comedy set featuring the late George Carlin, claiming to also use AI to write all of the content after training it on everything in the Carlin back catalog.
Unsurprisingly this has resulted in a massive amount of angry coverage, including from Carlin's own daughter (the Carlin estate have filed a lawsuit). Resurrecting people without their permission is clearly abhorrent.
But... did AI even write this? The author of this Ars Technica piece, Kyle Orland, started digging in.
It turns out the Dudesy podcast has been running with this premise since it launched in early 2022 - long before any LLM was capable of producing a well-crafted joke. The structure of the Carlin set goes way beyond anything I've seen from even GPT-4. And in a follow-up podcast episode, Dudesy co-star Chad Kultgen gave an O. J. Simpson-style "if I did it" semi-confession that described a much more likely authorship process.
I think this is a case of a human-pretending-to-be-an-AI - an interesting twist, given that the story started out being about an-AI-imitating-a-human.
I consulted with Kyle on this piece, and got a couple of neat quotes in there:
Either they have genuinely trained a custom model that can generate jokes better than any model produced by any other AI researcher in the world... or they're still doing the same bit they started back in 2022 [...]
The real story here is… everyone is ready to believe that AI can do things, even if it can't. In this case, it's pretty clear what's going on if you look at the wider context of the show in question. But anyone without that context, [a viewer] is much more likely to believe that the whole thing was AI-generated… thanks to the massive ramp up in the quality of AI output we have seen in the past 12 months.
Update 27th January 2024: The NY Times confirmed via a spokesperson for the podcast that the entire special had been written by Chad Kultgen, not by an AI.
2023
ChatGPT is one year old. Here’s how it changed the world. I’m quoted in this piece by Benj Edwards about ChatGPT’s one year birthday:
“Imagine if every human being could automate the tedious, repetitive information tasks in their lives, without needing to first get a computer science degree,” AI researcher Simon Willison told Ars in an interview about ChatGPT’s impact. “I’m seeing glimpses that LLMs might help make a huge step in that direction.”
Google was accidentally leaking its Bard AI chats into public search results. I’m quoted in this piece about yesterday’s Bard privacy bug: it turned out the share URL and “Let anyone with the link see what you’ve selected” feature wasn’t correctly setting a noindex parameter, and so some shared conversations were being swept up by the Google search crawlers. Thankfully this was a mistake, not a deliberate design decision, and it should be fixed by now.
The AI-assistant wars heat up with Claude Pro, a new ChatGPT Plus rival. I'm quoted in this piece about the new Claude Pro $20/month subscription from Anthropic:
Willison has also run into problems with Claude's morality filter, which has caused him trouble by accident: "I tried to use it against a transcription of a podcast episode, and it processed most of the text before—right in front of my eyes—it deleted everything it had done! I eventually figured out that they had started talking about bomb threats against data centers towards the end of the episode, and Claude effectively got triggered by that and deleted the entire transcript."
An Iowa school district is using ChatGPT to decide which books to ban. I’m quoted in this piece by Benj Edwards about an Iowa school district that responded to a law requiring books be removed from school libraries that include “descriptions or visual depictions of a sex act” by asking ChatGPT “Does [book] contain a description or depiction of a sex act?”.
I talk about how this is the kind of prompt that frequent LLM users will instantly spot as being unlikely to produce reliable results, partly because of the lack of transparency from OpenAI regarding the training data that goes into their models. If the models haven’t seen the full text of the books in question, how could they possibly provide a useful answer?
Study claims ChatGPT is losing capability, but some experts aren’t convinced. Benj Edwards talks about the ongoing debate as to whether or not GPT-4 is getting weaker over time. I remain skeptical of those claims—I think it’s more likely that people are seeing more of the flaws now that the novelty has worn off.
I’m quoted in this piece: “Honestly, the lack of release notes and transparency may be the biggest story here. How are we meant to build dependable software on top of a platform that changes in completely undocumented and mysterious ways every few months?”
Tech’s hottest new job: AI whisperer. No coding required. (via) I'm quoted in this Washington Post article about prompt engineering by Drew Harwell.
There are people who belittle prompt engineers, saying, 'Oh lord, you can get paid for typing things into a box. But these things lie to you. They mislead you. They pull you down false paths to waste time on things that don't work. You're casting spells - and, like in fictional magic, nobody understands how the spells work and, if you mispronounce them, demons come to eat you.
2022
Twitter pranksters derail GPT-3 bot with newly discovered “prompt injection” hack. I’m quoted in this Ars Technica article about prompt injection and the Remoteli.io Twitter bot.
2021
Apple’s tightly controlled App Store is teeming with scams. I’m quoted in an article in the Washington Post today (linked at the top of the homepage!) explaining how I got scammed on the App Store and spent $19 on a TV remote app with a similar name to the official Samsung app. I mistakenly assumed that the App Store review process wouldn’t allow an app called “Smart Things” to show up in search when I was looking for SmartThings, the official name—and assumed that Samsung were nickel-and-diming their customers rather than expecting the App Store review process to have failed so obviously.
2005
Wired News: Firefox Users Monkey With the Web. Greasemonkey on Wired—and I get quoted!