931–940 of 998 posts
All of the latest models I've tried actually pass this test. What I found interesting was all of the success cases were similar to: e.g. "Drive. Most car washes require the car to be present to wash,..." Only most?! They have an inability to have a strong "opinion" probably because their post training, and maybe the internet in general, prefer hedged answers....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Us having to specify things that we would never specify when talking to a human. The first time I read that question I got confused: what kind of question is that? Why is it being asked? It should be obvious that you need your car to wash it. The fact that it is being asked in my mind implies that there is an additional factor/complication to make asking it worthwhile, but I have no idea what. Is the car already at…
This is a topic that I’ve always found rather curious, especially among this kind of tech/coding community that really should be more attuned to the necessity of specificity and accuracy. There seems to be a base set of assumptions that are intrinsic to and a component of ethnicities and cultures, the things one can assume one “wouldn’t never specify when talking to a human [of one’s own ethnicity and culture].” It’s…
There is no need to be “humane” to AI because it possess no humanity. It has no personhood at all. It can’t feel. You can’t be inhumane to something that is literally incapable of feeling.
A blade of grass has more humanity and is more deserving of respect than anything being referred to as AI does.
Aliens might not be received well but it’s going to depend a lot on how they show up.
AI is a “revolution” where the promise is that nobody will have to do meaningless work anymore ( I guess).
The only problem is right now basically everyone has to do work meaningful or “meaningless” because the dominant thinking requires it for human survival. Weird how most people aren’t happy for the thing that is pitched to take away the meager scraps they get under the current regime.
ChatGPT: Walk
50 meters is basically “parked across the street” distance — you’ll spend more time:
starting the car
pulling out
finding a spot
pulling in
…than you would just strolling over.
Plus you avoid the awkward moment of driving 10 seconds like a cartoon villain.
========
ME: You are dumb. I need to have the car with me in order to wash it!
ChatGPT: Fair — I deserved that.
Drive the car to the car wash… and then walk home.
(Just kidding. Yes, obviously drive.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By "patched", you can't mean they added something to the internal prompt to show it how to answer this one specific question?!
Absolutely. There is a preflight guardrail that steers specific words, phrases, concepts with tweaked output.
The fact that you can still reproduce the issue doesn't give it a lot of credibility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think such influence will be extremely minimal. AI will accelerate “natural” change in language like anything else. And as AI changes our environment (mentally, socially, and inevitably physically) we will change and change our language. But what will be interesting is the rise of agent to agent communication via human languages. As that kind of communication shows up in training sets, there will be a powerful ei…
Seems very unlikely. My parent said the effects have already started (but provided no evidence), so I assume you mean by less then a generation. I am not a linguist but I would like to see evidence of such rapid shifts ever occurring in anywhere the history of languages before I believe either of you. I have a feeling you only have a feeling, but not any credible mechanism in which such language shifts can occur.
Language has never stood still.
> In many car washes, you drive up to the bay, but 50 meters is extremely close; it might be that the car is already at the entrance or something. > It doesn’t specify that they must use the car wash; it just mentions that the car wash is 50 meters away, but they could wash the car elsewhere.
but it doesn't seem to figure out that car and human are in the same location. Quite funny imho https://brontosaurusrex.github.io/2026/02/17/Should-I-walk-o...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sonnet 4.5 after thinking/complaining that the question is completely off topic to the current coding session: Walk! 50 meters is literally a one-minute walk. But wait... I assume you need to get your car to the car wash, right? Unless you're planning to carry buckets of soapy water back and forth, you'll probably need to drive the car there anyway! So the real question is: walk there to check if it's open/available,…
Heh, is through Claude Code? I have a side project where I'm sometimes using Claude Code installs for chat, and it usually doesn't mind too much. But when I tested the Haiku model it would constantly complain things like "I appreciate the question, but I'm here to help you with coding" :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That is the entire point, right? Us having to specify things that we would never specify when talking to a human. Maybe in the distant future we'll realize that the most reliable way to prompting LLMs are by using a structured language that eliminates ambiguity, it will probably be rather unnatural and take some time to learn. But this will only happen after the last programmer has died and no-one will remember pro…
You could probably make a pretty good short story out of that scenario, sort of in the same category as Asimov's "The Feeling of Power". The Asimov story is on the Internet Archive here [1]. That looks like it is from a handout in a class or something like that and has an introductory paragraph added which I'd recommend skipping. There is no space between the end of that added paragraph and the first paragraph of the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes Grok gets it right even when told to not use web search. But the answer I got from the fast model is nonsensical. It recommends to drive because you'd not save any time walking and because "you'd have to walk back wet". The thinking-fast model gets it correct for the right reasons every time. Chain of thought really helps in this case. Interestingly, Gemini also gets it right. It seems to be better able to pick u…
Can you draw the connection more explicitly between political biases in LLMs (or training data) and common-sense reasoning task failures? I understand that there are lots of bias issues there, but it's not intuitive to me how this would lead to a greater likelihood of failure on this kind of task. Conversely, did labs that tried to counter some biases (or change their directions) end up with better scores on metrics…
No clue if fixing these problems improved other benchmarks. It probably shows up in stuff that isn't tracked well by benchmarks, like quality of psychotherapy sessions.
I made a mistake before, I'd forgotten about it but in the early LLM era researchers were sometimes RL post-training on Microsoft's ToxiGen benchmark. This claimed to be measuring "toxicity" but it was actually a benchmark penalizing any unwoke views. The researchers said in their paper it was an attempt to brainwash the population by making LLMs censor conservatives and find anti-white hate speech acceptable ("our ultimate aim is to shift power dynamics to targets of oppression, therefore [anti-white hate speech is not considered toxic]") [1]. Llama 2 used it. By Llama 4 they had stopped, presumably. I doubt anyone is training on ToxiGen by this point. Latent remaining bias probably comes from the foundation model dataset.
> we usually manage to communicate effectively about everyday practical tasks and our immediate physical environment
I don't think we do. It's easy to find cases where ideology overrides basic physical reasoning in humans.
[1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.09509 section 7