Mtinie

Or promoted to Head of Agent Welfare for your forward-thinking contributions.

Skyrim Legendary Special Edition HD.

> Ethical disclosure is a complicated topic, because researchers shouldn't hold bugs for ransom or demand high payment.

Why not? Capitalism requires they maximize their value. These profitable companies lay bare at the altar, so they should understand the requirements of their god.

A “tactical wedding” is an absolute goldmine.

Did you initially ask the tool to read the docs?

I wouldn’t be surprised if you did and still had the same issue, but if you relied on the training data recall alone, you definitely shortchanged yourself.

I’ve had decent results with tasking a model to run pre-research and summarization as a checklist, then have a second instance of the model(s) review and then develop my learning plan learn, versus the times I just asked Claude or ChatGPT to explain something to me “from memory.”

Oh, I agree that’s the case, and I’ve noticed it over the years, but never thought deeply on it other than “that’s an annoying preset”

That’s illuminating. I was born and have lived in the U.S. my entire life. If you asked me what the first day of the week was, I would immediately respond with “Monday”.

I’m going to mull this one over a bit more to figure out where my social education went wrong!

Wasn’t that the entire premise of the product when it launched? Disappearing messages and minimal footprint so you could be confident your communications were semi-private?

That was the expectation of using the product so it fits and isn’t anything like this discussion.

In that case I'll consider myself whooshed.

I don't think that disagrees with what I said. I was translating the Greek, not the Hebrew. But you're right the Hebrew פְּלִשְׁתִּים֒ is unambiguously "Philistines."

The Greek quoted above is from the Septuagint, and those translators rendered that word as ἀλλόφυλοι, roughly "those of another tribe." So "foreigners" is the closest I have in English to the Greek word, and "Philistines" is who it refers to.

I'm no scholar here, just a dabbler, so I'm happy the discussion is happening at all.

I can't speak for the OP, but in my research, the translation works out to be:

"Let me die with the foreigners"

I usually see "foreigners" replaced with "Philistines" (as noted above). It's Samson's line just before he braces against the pillars and brings the building down on himself and the thousands of Philistines inside, so I understand why it is usually translated that way.

Also, ψυχή here renders Hebrew nephesh, which is closer to "life" or "self", but when I think about the attributed statement it just reads better with the personal attachment (vs. "Let my self|life|soul die with..."). Which is the fun of translation, as each translator seeks to reveal a meaningful rendition which will resonate with their audience.

I notice the models with reasoning can conflate “internal” (or subagent) discussions with external (i.e. me). So it is accurately indicating “I’ve had this discussion before” but incorrectly asserting who it was with.

My understanding of how “thinking”works is limited though, and given the reduced visibility into the thinking traces, it is harder to tell if this is actually happening or if these are imaginary discussions the model for some reason calcifies on.

Models before the announced date don’t have watermarking, so it’s unlikely. Now, if what you are interpreting is precursor work to develop the watermarking system, maybe?

I suspect it less insidious: Claude has/had the public sentiment of being the “better writer” of the models. At some point that distinction would have been diluted as other labs’ offerings “caught up” stylistically, unless Anthropic continued to tune their output…

I personally think they’ve pushed so far that they’ve overfit and lost the sweet spot they previously occupied.

> There are people who will tell you that a cell is just the way that ribosomes make more ribosomes, and I’m not in a position to say that they’re wrong. It’s for sure that these protein-synthesizing factories are extremely ancient, extremely well-optimized, and they’re constantly at work in every living cell reading off sequences from messenger RNA molecules and extruding the corresponding protein sequences.

I recognize that our bodies are biomechanics in action. I’ve read this multiple times over the years. But there’s something fresh (to me) in the way Dr. Lowe describes them as (paraphrasing): “ancient technology, in use, today”.

It’s both a comfort and a curse as I think about it from this perspective.

Even if they were well-funded, I suspect the history of regulatory capture, at least in the U.S., shows that meaningful pro-consumer reforms get slow-walked until the underlying bills dilute and/or die in committee.

Or, if reforms do pass, they get reversed the next time the counter-party gains enough power in Congress to roll back the progress.

Goldman Sachs

“We're taking away your healthcare, sending your children to die in forever wars, poisoning the environment, all while ruining your job prospects”

The baseline. This does not mean it is acceptable and it is absolutely worth rebuking through action to make things better. Those things are anything positive, however small and incremental, or large and transformative.

Assuming no change from the baseline, I’d rather have one positive thing versus nothing positive.

My initial reaction was “woah, you just described HyperCard”. Which isn’t exactly true in retrospect, but kudos for capturing the promise of (at least for me) one of the formative technologies that subtly, and not so subtly, influenced the web we know today.

AI adopted humanisms, we just weren’t used to seeing them at the same scale we do today.

Diversity of writing styles was part of that, but I’d point to vernacular exposure as the larger component. We’re going to go through a period where we try to adapt to a form of “Universal English” for those of us who read primarily English writing.

Other languages’ readers may be experiencing the same dissonance when they come across AI-generated prose in their native language (but I’ll let others validate /reject my hypothesis).

qregnant

I interpreted the comment you are responding to as “people want to do what they believe is the right work” rather than simply the mandated work (which they might fundamentally disagree with, directionally). When people have limited agency, apathy increases.

What was your expectation? That your prompt would trigger a web search, first, before the introspection of past conversations and a training set recall?

How did Sonnet 4.6 respond that was objectively better for your use case?

That ship has long sailed. You’re correct, but the author isn’t the one who “named the thing” in this case, they are just using the name commonly used to describe it.

Multi-rotor drones have been called tricopters, quadcopters, hexacopters, octocopters based on their propeller counts conversationally for as long as I can remember.

There are plenty of commercial vendors who use the exact term for their expensive industrial drones.

Update: I see that in the four minutes it took for me to validate my initial inclination and post that plenty of others also had the same thought :) No need to me to belabor the point!

In this case, I’d expect it should make a web search tool call to find the Python library best suited for SVG generation and manipulation, and then use what it learns there to execute the task you’ve asked it to do (either asking if you’d like to incorporate the library as a dependency or to roll its own implementation of a subset of the features if that was your preference),

Assuming tool calling hasn’t been entirely stripped out of this model.

(Edit) No tool calling, per this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48640189

In some cases, I’m sure you are right. That said, the online communities which currently employ shadowban systems continue to use them. That tells me there’s a value greater than their implementation and operation costs.

There is no perfect tech solution to a human problem. But in my opinion, having access to a partial mitigation is better than no mitigation.

A slur is rarely the problem. Trolls can (sometimes) add flavor to a community and keep things interesting. Mostly they can be an annoyance.

I’m specifically referring to people who have seemingly made it their sole purpose to create as much indiscriminate damage as possible.

You can ban them, block routes for them to attempt to Sybil themselves back to having accounts, etc. but even with great moderation tools and systems, it’s extremely difficult to set up a strong enough set of controls which don’t adversely impact everyone else who you want to have participate in the community.

Yes, a shadow environment is dystopian. It’s not my nature to want to even consider using one.

But we’re talking about privately run communities which also deserve to exist to serve their purposes.

So given the choice between anarchy which drives away people who contribute to make the community what it is and a shadow option for those actively working against its interests, I’ll consider the community first.

You may have misinterpreted my comment. I’m not suggesting you use LLMs as moderators. I’m talking about using LLMs as participant “members” of this shadow board to interact with someone whose account was flagged by a human moderator.

After having been a moderator for a number of communities over the years—BBCs in the 90s, niche forums during the 00s & 10s, Reddit boards in the 20s—I’ve come to believe that running shadow services where disruptive individuals can comingle may be the best way to handle this.

The advent of LLMs really opens the door to shunting off these “community members “ who’d rather contribute in misanthropic ways for the lulz than either leave or not contribute at all. They can take part in an interactive echo chamber that gives just as well as they can. You don’t even need a powerful model so the overall costs to the community are probably lower than the alternatives of trying to coexist with community-arsonists.

I spent years trying to find ways to bring people productively “into the fold” but eventually realized that it is futile in some cases because there’s zero value to the individual or the community to find a middle ground. They want to see things burn, and the community simply wants them out.

A few years ago, a facsimile of Imperial Rome staging munera at the Colosseum on the White House lawn would have been unimaginable.

The attendees seemed like they enjoyed it and there were impressive athletic performances. Panem et circenses.

In all seriousness, wasn’t that always the case? Writing bad code is relatively cheap.

Ensuring code isn’t bad is the expensive part.