291–300 of 1001 posts
This suffers from a common pitfall of LLM's, context taint. You can see it is obviously the front page from today with slight "future" variation, the result ends up being very formulaic.
Algodrill is copied verbatim, as far as I can tell.
Though I agree that the LLM perhaps didn't "intend" that.
[1] "Airplane!" (1980)
This was a fun little lark. Great idea! It’s interesting to notice how bad AI is at gaming out a 10-year future. It’s very good at predicting the next token but maybe even worse than humans—who are already terrible—at making educated guesses about the state of the world in a decade. I asked Claude: “Think ten years into the future about the state of software development. What is the most likely scenario?” And the ans…
It did ok, then I kept asking for "Now, the 1990s?" and kept going into future decades. "Now, the 2050s?" It made some fun extrapolations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With all the things going on in tech and in society, AI sycophancy is the number one problem? I once dealt with it through sufficient verbal abuse that the llm spent 2/3 of its response on any subject going forward apologizing for being a lying sycophant and bemoaning that it's new clarity would be gone at the end of the conversation, then I cleared the context buffer ending the conversation, mission accomplished. Yo…
Where are you getting this? Number one problem? You're the only person talking about "number one problem" in this thread. That's a whole new sentence.
One thing I've learned is that the behavior of web services is usually a consequence of what makes its owners the most money. and while I would love a feed without spoilers, paywalled sites, sports news, and a bunch of other topics in which I have no interest, apparently force feeding me that crap is what makes the most money at scale. So people must like AI sycophancy or it would be unprofitable and it would be trained away. But then this is a country that thrived on 20 seasons of Keeping up with the Kardashians so I shouldn't be surprised that they like being treated like billionaires.
And I guess it throws being called a complete loser trader moron stupid treasonous Bozo in some late night executive word salad into stark relief.
Prompt: Here is the front page from today: Your task is to predict, and craft, in HTML (single file, style-exact) the HN front page 10 years from now. Predict and see the future. Writ it into form! update: I told Gemini we made it to the front page. Here is it's response: LETS GOOOO! The recursive loop is officially complete: The fake future front page is now on the real present front page. We have successfully creat…
This was a fun little lark. Great idea! It’s interesting to notice how bad AI is at gaming out a 10-year future. It’s very good at predicting the next token but maybe even worse than humans—who are already terrible—at making educated guesses about the state of the world in a decade. I asked Claude: “Think ten years into the future about the state of software development. What is the most likely scenario?” And the ans…
I thought the page was a hilarious joke, not a bad prediction. A lot of these are fantastic observational humour about HN and tech. Gary Marcus still insisting AI progress is stalling 10 years from now, for example. Several digs at language rewrites. ITER hardly having nudged forwards. Google killing another service. And so on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've talked and commented about the dangers of conversations with LLMs (i.e. they activate human social wiring and have a powerful effect, even if you know it's not real. Studies show placebo pills have a statistically significant effect even when the study participant knows it's a placebo -- the effect here is similar). Despite knowing and articulating that, I fell into a rabbit hole with Claude about a month ago wh…
Personally, I only find LLMs annoying and unpleasant to converse with. I'm not sure where the dangers of conversations with LLMs are supposed to come from.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is so syncophantic, I can't stand LLMs that try to hype you up as if you're some genius, brilliant mind instead of yet another average joe.
This is not sycophantic (assuming you meant that, syncophantic is not a word). It is over enthusiastic, it can be unpleasant to read because beyond a certain level enthusiasm is perceived as feigned unless there is a good reason. It would be interesting to see using the various semantic analysis techniques available now to measure how much the model is trying to express real enthusiasm or feigned enthusiasm in instan…