Fuck AI

For context since no one has mentioned it. This is about the dataset that the model uses for training. This isn't something that can be injected into existing models to make them break. Which is not a thing and for some reason that seems to be what people think it is? It's not about you typing a prompt into ChatGPT and breaking it. Is that what people are thinking here? I really can't tell.

Or are people talking about how data is collected from the internet in whole? Like, they think we can generate false data that models will use? In the context of the article there is no realistic way to do that. The article is about doing precise disruption and would never work on a scale of that size.

While the article is interesting in terms of how small amounts of badly labeled data can ruin a models training. Well, it's not really anything new. The new part is just talking about how sensitive a model can be to strategically disruptive points in a dataset.

Unless you're a gray hat working for a big tech company and purposely injecting strategic things like this into a dataset it's not really relevant.

Useful in the right context. For sure. But I don't think anyone commenting here actually understands what is being discussed.