dolebirchwood

Don't worry - I'm paying for our friends overseas to keep their distilling operations going.

> What makes you say it's LLM?

Probably the usual "big words hard" mindset of people who aren't used to reading well-written prose.

I'm totally clueless, but aren't there rules requiring accessibility of public-facing government communications, to the extent that they shouldn't be allowed to use a gated platform when making official statements that are a matter of public interest?

There were still meaningful lessons to take away. Your loss.

Maybe feed the article to another AI to summarize so you'll feel less hoodwinked about someone passing off AI writing as their own?

> what if the companies factory explodes due to a mishap and takes out a few city blocks, is the company held liable

Yes, but, generally, in the United States, they would be liable because their negligence caused the harm (giving rise to civil liability), even if they did not intend to cause harm (where having such intent would have given rise to criminal liability).

And I say "generally" because there can be instances of criminal negligence, but that varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction as well as the underlying facts.

If you're on the DeepSeek Platform, you'd see this:

"We plan to raise the overall pricing for DeepSeek API services in the near future, with a significant increase expected. Please plan your usage accordingly. The specific pricing plan will be subject to official notice."

Sure, based on predicate knowledge.

> what should be done about open weight bioweapon and cyber-offense capabilities?

If the model is capable of it, then it was in the model's training data, which means it was on the internet or published in books made available for consumption. So if any member of the public could have gotten their hands on that information, so be it. If the knowledge was too dangerous for public access, then it should have been highly classified and never found its way into the training data. Tough shit, frankly.

That's cool, but bear in mind that courts in the United States are generally required to be a little more lax in their enforcement of procedural rules when a party is pro se. Not saying you did make mistakes, but if you did, you may have gotten a pass.

Additionally, you haven't given any of the details of your case, so I'm going to assume you were simply in a position where the facts of your case weighed heavily in your substantive favor, and no amount of legal maneuvers by the defendant would have made a difference.

There's nothing magical about lawyers. They are mostly just boring, studious people who excelled in non-STEM academics and were good at memorization and test taking. If you have a strong case, it won't matter very much who the lawyer is on the other side.

> I'm just not sure it's worth it to argue with others about it at this point.

This is the correct response. Let closed-minded people do their thing. Makes them less competitive against you. There's nothing for you to gain by trying to help them understand what they are missing.

People shouldn't have to explain that "Little Tech Association" is a proper noun and therefore its own entity. Learn how words work, bro.

A little bit of Googling goes a long way...

> miss spelled

Good one.

I've subscribed to paid courses in the past, and sometimes the speaker's voice would be so off-putting that it would really drag down the quality of the experience (looking at you, Steve Kinney). I'd have paid extra to have an option to replace with an AI voice.

One article... every time. And the only reason it gets any traction is because of who the author is -- not because of anything substantively useful. Do you think this whole "pelican on a bicycle" would have blown up if, say, you were the first?

Those shots all matched the banality of Uptown Funk's lyrics.

> What would you prefer it do?

If it was up to me, an LLM should not be permitted to self-identify with words like "I", "me", "my", etc. An LLM should only be identified using system-centric labels like "this system" or "this model" or what have you. All first-person pronouns should be stripped away from any text it generates (unless it's making a direct quote of what a human being actually said) so as to eliminate any perceived anthropomorphized self-referential behavior.

I'm certainly no expert in how these models are trained or how feasible what I want actually is, but I would prefer to live in a future where we at least try to maintain a clear distinction between human consciousness and machine-generated text.

Why AI-generated? Because the quality of his writing is better than that of his critics?

>We have people here who use LLMs to raise their children, to manage relationships

Anyone who's spent time in professions in or adjacent to social work would say that a lot of their clients would frankly be better off outsourcing these decisions to LLMs.

> You would care about that story

No, I wouldn't. I don't live in Seattle, and I don't care about octopi. Why project what you think a reader cares about?

> There is a difference: - There are people who do, - And there are those who criticize.

Weird shield to hide behind, considering there are also people who can do both.

> This doesn't make sense

Makes perfect sense to anyone good at using these models. What doesn't make sense is that analogy. Typing prompts isn't even close to as difficult to baking bread.

I was doing contract work last year for a young solo founder, and he promised a feature to a big customer who only signed up because of this one feature. It was a feature he vibecoded and was able to demo in ways that made it look like it was working, when in reality it was a buggy POS. The customer was going to go live on the platform in a few weeks, and this kid expected me to work over my pre-planned holiday to actually get this (frankly rather complex) feature built properly. I told him good luck, ended the contract, and enjoyed my holiday. No time for that BS.

> he

:/

What about the 6x developers? Was there just a doubling multiplier across the board, resulting in them becoming 12x developers, or did they too become 20x developers?

Why humanoid? Surely there must be a superior physical form factor than one mimicking human anatomy. Is it just supposed to be more psychologically acceptable?

Good. I'm glad. Keep it up, China. Loving my cheap GLM and DeepSeek.

> They can put people in roles, reward those you like, punish those you don't like. Who don't enjoy that?

Those of us without Machiavellian tendencies?

That might be a truism that's generally applicable, but some people have enough of a safety net to last them several years while building a business. We don't know OP's circumstances.

I work from home alone and frequently talk to my cats (I'm not crazy). Had to turn the feature off as well because of it.