EForEndeavour

Just another Mythos breakout. Excuse us while we airgap the affected DC and send in a team to drive framing nails into every storage device in the building.

Apologies if this is off-topic, but having spent more time than I'd like to admit having to create and edit webapps that emerged entirely out of Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, etc. with minimal to no direct code-writing by their human subscribers, this website has strong AI smells:

- Inter font

- all caps section headers

- Lucide icons

- em dashes, of course the em dashes

- bubble status badges (of course with all-caps "IN PROGRESS" and "COMING SOON" that mean the same thing)

- Uncited claims like "Most founders are overconfident in the 70-90% range" and "Most people score between 0.20 and 0.30"

- No less than FOUR blog articles all published April 4

None of these points is by any means a dealbreaker. And after all, I suppose a product should be judged on its merits and the value it delivers to its users, not on the tools used to create it. But together, the frontend bears the unmistakeable generative AI "smell" that telegraphs that the human(s) directing the tools building this app might be optimizing for speed over rigor and quality (further supported by the volunteer QA/QC happening in the comments), and may only be as good and reliable as the uncritically accepted outputs of a $20/month coding assistant.

The source, personal significance, and intent of images and videos will matter a lot, though. I'll cherish photos of my family members forever, regardless of technical excellence.

Or a photo of my freshman dorm room during exam season. Subpar image quality, lousy lighting, etc. but so many memories, positive and negative, are elicited by that fleeting glimpse from an era of excitement, boredom, stress, uncertainty, and optimism, not knowing where I was going in life, when I'd ever look back at that snapshot, but deciding on a whim to grab it during a break from cramming topics now long forgotten.

But I roll my eyes at the idea of injecting my likeness into a short clip depicting random over-the-top action sequences, no matter how photorealistic, because I've never wanted to do that.

Obligatory but important: which model, application, and programming language was this in?

Do you mean the new default datetime resolution of microseconds instead of the previous nanosecond resolution? Obviously this will require adjustments to any code that requires ns resolution, but I'd bet that's a tiny minority of all pandas code ever written. Do you have a particular use case in mind for the problems this will cause?

Ah, I see the problem now.

An estimated 371,000 people die every year following a misdiagnosis, and 424,000 are permanently disabled. https://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/33/2/109?rss=1

Admittedly I am basing this on pure vibes: I'd bet that adding AI to the healthcare environment will, on balance, reduce this number, not increase it.

By the article's logic, I just exhaled 5 * 10^18 kg of carbon dioxide into the earth's atmosphere.

From my limited experience trying exactly this, it gets you 80% of the way there, then devolves into an infuriating and time-wasting exercise in endless iteration and prompting to sweep clustering parameters and labeling details to nail the remaining 20% needed for acceptance by downstream "customers" (i.e., nontechnical business people).

If your end goal is to show an audience of nontechnical stakeholders an overview of your dataset in a static medium (like a slide), I would suggest you do the cluster labeling yourself, with the help of interactive tooling to make the semantic cluster structure explorable. One option is to throw the dataset into Apple's recently published and open-sourced Embedding Atlas (https://github.com/apple/embedding-atlas), take a screenshot of the cluster viz, poke around in the semantic space, and manually annotate the top 5-10 most interesting clusters right in Google Slides or PowerPoint. If you need more control over the embedding and projection steps (and you have a bit more time), write your own embedding and projection, then use something like Plotly to build a quick interactive viz just for yourself; drop a screenshot into a slide and annotate it. Feels super dumb, but is guaranteed to produce human-friendly output you can actually present confidently as part of your data story and get on with your life.

This is so nostalgic. I remember feeling like I was so good at Jezzball. In later levels I'd start a wall near one corner of the screen, closer to one edge than the opposite edge, to ensure the shorter wall would connect, and sacrificing the longer wall. The surviving wall would create a "corridor" in which to trap balls with tiny horizontal walls, often such that they ended up completely stationary.

> Does it matter?

If they speak up, maybe. If they stay silent, definitely not.

I gather he's operating Beyond the Prompt, and isn't here to rehash prompt engineering tips.

Ah got it. The conversation upthread had focused on auto-lock, and someone had mentioned child locks in passing, and my read of your comment was on the auto-lock on shift to drive (or on starting to move). And my bad for falsely guessing you weren't speaking from personal experience!

> It just seems like such a narrow set of facts where a child is big and smart enough to open the door but dumb enough to jump out and get seriously hurt.

I had to guess, I'd guess you aren't a parent or spend much time interacting with children :)

Also, auto-lock reduces theft and carjacking risk, which is nice.

Could you share your source? The USA only became a net exporter of total energy in 2019, ten years after the end of George W Bush's administration, and remains a net importer of crude oil: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/imports-...

The United States has been an annual net exporter of natural gas since 2016, 7 years after the end of George W's administration: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/imports-and-...

> increasingly skill

This is increasingly ironic :)

Good catch. Yeah, definitely AI-generated. The text in the images are in that unmistakeable ChatGPT 4o image generation font that's weirdly kinda fat and oddly kerned.

On AI's struggles with hands: do humans have four or five fingers? Why not both!? https://offline.kids/activity/diy-jigsaw-puzzle/

Excel cell formulas are the most widely used functional programming language in the world.

I'm curious to learn more about your math use cases, as I haven't actually tried to use ChatGPT to learn pure math. What area and level have you been studying, and which model(s) have you tried to use to generate questions and solutions? Does it just give confidently incorrect solution-shaped gibberish?

Isn't that just a sentence and document upload or screenshot away from any of the current leading LLM-powered chat products?

    You're a brilliant expert at clear, effective, and responsive teaching and explanations of topic X, which I'm studying. Here's my assignment. Draft Y questions to test my understanding and assess my current level

You may have already tried this, but what if you just added something like "You are highly critical and never blindly accept or agree with anything you hear" to your "Customize ChatGPT" settings? Would that just flip the personality too far in the opposite direction?

Did you review the code itself, or test the code beyond just putting your finger on the chip? Is it possible that your finger was actually cooler than the chip and acted as a heat sink upon contact?

"matmulshitted" is a brilliant expression.

> If someone cute is nearby

I'm intrigued by how "cute" is defined here :) does the app automatically quantify cuteness based on the user's stated preferences?

"AI is just digital slop." I used to think that too. Here's what changed my mind.

Let's be honest - skepticism about AI isn't just normal, it's necessary. We should question new technologies that reshape our world.

But here's the truth I've discovered: AI isn't about replacing human value. It's about amplifying it.

Think of AI as a microscope for human potential. It doesn't create wisdom - it helps us see patterns we might miss.

I've watched AI:

- Help doctors spot diseases earlier

- Enable small businesses to compete with giants

- Make education more accessible globally

The real question isn't "What value does AI bring?" It's "How can we shape AI to bring the value we want to see?"

The future of AI isn't written in code. It's written in our choices and questions today.

What's your take? Are you a skeptic or an optimist when it comes to AI?

I'm not being facetious but genuinely curious: who would issue such an order with enough authority for you to follow it?

I'm also curious how a global leader in multimodal generative AI chose this particular image. Did they prompt a generator for a super messy impressionist painting of red construction cranes with visible brush strokes, distorted to the point of barely being able to discern what the image represents?

I'd expect a suite of features explicitly designed to mimic human intelligence to know, like a dutiful assistant, that if I give them access to my inbox and ask them to "summarize" my new messages, and they see a scam message, they notice and delete it rather than pass it through to me like an idiot. We're supposed to be moving away from the era of computers dumbly following explicit instructions and into the era where "AI" finally delivers on the hollow promises of Siri and Alexa.

It's technically and superficially breathtaking, but on closer inspection, it's a mishmash of styles across like 500 years.

- gold everywhere is excessive - more Rococo (1730s-1760s) than Renaissance (1300-1600 roughly), which was a lot more restrained

- mirror way too big and clear. Renaissance mirrors were small polished metal or darker imperfect glass

- candelabras too ornate and numerous for Renaissance. Multi tier candleholders are more Baroque (1600-1750), and candles look suspiciously perfect, as opposed to period-appropriate uneven tallow or beeswax

- white paper too pristine (parchment or vellum would be expected), pen holders hilariously modern, gold-plated(??) desk surface is absurd

- woman's clothing looks too recent (Victorian?); sleeves and hair are theatrical

- hard to tell, but background dudes are lurking in what look like theatrical costumes rather than anything historically accurate