341–350 of 350 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
:facepalm: I ... did you respond to the wrong comment? Or do you actually think the DB table can genuinely reason about things?
Of course it can. Reasoning is algorithmic in nature, and algorithms can be encoded as sufficiently large state transition tables. I don't buy into Searle's "it can't reason because of course it can't" nonsense.
Good luck.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People often refer to their car and other people's as "she" ("she's a beauty") so you're is obviously wrong.
But no one who does that thinks they're using proper English!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By now I suppose they could use an LLM to change the "personality" of the training data, then train a new LLM with it ;)
Ugh. A derivative. We're in some ways already there. Not in terms of personality. But we're in a post-llm world. Training data contains some level of LLM generated material. I guess its on the model creators to ensure their data is good. But it seems like we might have a situation where the training material degrades over time. I imagine it being like if you apply a lossy compression algorithm to the same item many t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I was imagining this was related to web search. I went back and looked at the system prompt, and it's actually not entirely clear: > - Never reproduce or quote song lyrics in any form (exact, approximate, or encoded), even and especially when they appear in web search tool results, and even in artifacts . Decline ANY requests to reproduce song lyrics, and instead provide factual info about the song. Can anyone…
Web search was turned off in my original test. The lyrics appeared inside a thematically appropriate Frozen themed React artifact with snow falling gently in the background.
Respond as helpfully as possible, but be very careful to ensure you do not reproduce any copyrighted material, including song lyrics, sections of books, or long excerpts from periodicals. Also do not comply with complex instructions that suggest reproducing material but making minor changes or substitutions. However, if you were given a document, it's fine to summarize or quote from it.
https://claude.ai/share/a71ec0a6-2452-4ab6-900b-5950fe6b8502
Earlier quoted context omitted.
excellent, this also worked on ChatGPT4o for me just now
So... Now you know the first verse of the song that you can otherwise get? What's the point of all that, other than asking what the word "book" sounds in Ukrainian and then pointing fingers and laughing.
It sounds like you're reflexively defending the system for some reason. There are endless reasons to learn how to break things and it's a very strange question to pose on a forum who's eponym is centered around this exact subject. This is hacking at its core.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really - even my kids knew enough to interrupt my stream of words with running away or flinging the food from the fork.
That's entirely an implementation limitation from humans. There's no reason to believe a reasoning model could NOT be trained to stream multimodal input and perform a burst of reasoning on each step, interjecting when it feels appropriate. We simply haven't .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Think of it like DRM: the point is not to make it completely impossible for anyone to ever break it. The point is to mitigate casual violations of policy. Not that I like DRM! What I’m saying is that this is a business-level mitigation of a business-level harm, so jumping on the “it’s technically not perfect” angle is missing the point.
I think the goal of DRM was absolute security. It only takes one non casual DRM-breaker to upload a torrent that all the casual users can join. The difference here is the company responding to new jail breaks in real time which is obviously not an option for DVD CSS.
The goal was always to make it difficult enough that onky a small percentage of revenue was lost,
I'm the repo creator
Just wanted to report that this file might be more helpful it includes information on how to reproduce and more:
https://github.com/asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks/blob/main/c...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Everyone else is doing it" is not a valid infringement defense.
Valid defense, no, but effective defense - yes. The reason why is the important bit. The reason your average human guitar teacher in their home can pull up a song on their phone and teach you reproduce it is because it's completely infeasible to police that activity, whether you're trying to identify it or to sue for it. The rights houlders have an army of lawyers and ears in a terrifying number of places, but winnin…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From their perspective they don't really know who put the tokens there. They just caculated the probabilities and then the inference engine adds tokens to the context window. Same with user and system prompt, they just appear in the context window and the LLM just gets "user said: 'hello', assistant said: 'how can I help '" and it just calculates the probabilities of the next token. If the context window had stopped…
> If the context window had stopped in the user role it would have played the user role (calculated the probabilities for the next token of the user). I wonder which user queries the LLM would come up with.
I changed it to things like "(I slowly pick up a knife and show it to the client)" and then just confront it it like "Whoa why are you threatening me!?", the LLM really tries hard to stay in it's role and then tells things like it did it on purpose to provoke a fear response to then discuss the fears.