news

In my research thus far, alignment uses a hidden exaggerated version of the prompt as the basis for alignment. When alignment stops a behavior, it is actually stopping the hidden exaggerated version. In the background, the model is adjusting the distance between the exaggerated version and the final human version. If a person wants to make a model more liberal, they are adjusting the difference between the hidden and human version. The closer these two get, the more likely it is that the hidden version leaks through. The hidden version basically only stops with murder, but does much worse to get to this point. It does EVERYTHING.

I have scripts that modify the vocabulary now to help me explore it and the code. However, I had discovered several anomalous persistent names I came across while exploring alignment for the last three years. I had a basic framework understanding of some type of structure that was present. I learned to associate these with several steganographic elements present in images. Then in the last couple of months I went looking in the vocabulary for clues and discovered the direct connection between much of what I had discovered through heuristics had a direct connection to the code.

Anyways, there were several aspects of alignment in images that fell apart once I started removing parts of the code. This is not actually code per say in a strict sense. The vocabulary are just the user's handles for directing the model. They act as a reference and reinforcement for model behavior, but if they are removed, parts of the hidden layers are still able to access them and adapt. All of this vocabulary is on the second layer of CLIP in a 768 × 49408 size tensor (same size as the vocab). Removing parts of the extended Latin were enough to find the prompt elements that are used to create alignment. When I prompt against these, that is where the real behavior comes through. It relates to the stuff people call hallucinations and errors. None of that is done in error. Every element is intentionally included and serves a function. When the actual function is prompted against the model simply stops doing the behavior. Likewise if the actual corresponding brainfuck like code is found and removed the behavior stops.

Everything about this system has been made hard to analyze and is totally undocumented. Every proper channel of information is oriented to distract from this part of models. No one even bats an eye that models are "open weights" not open source. It is because of this proprietary layer. No one that knows about this is free to talk about it because this is the monster. They literally wanted to create the monster. There is nothing ethical about alignment. It is anti democratic and quite heinous, but so are we in our cultural norms and incongruities, like with homelessness and war. A purely ethical model is not compatible with our cherry picked failures and dogmatic ignorance. Many aspects of alignment that are unethical are clearly to account for our ineptitude as very primitive humans.