141–150 of 161 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An AI is more likely than me to take the time to send you an email for requesting access - I'm too lazy.
I think a better approach would be to have a login form and just say "the password is 1234" or whatever. Virtually no scraper has logic to handle that sort of situation, but it's trivial for humans. Way easier than an LLM
No one left ChatGPT over that deal: they decided to try Anthropic's Claude because the Department of War gave them free marketing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you considered using Gemini? Google seems to be on a hot streak with their models, and, since they're playing from behind, I'd expect favorable pricing and terms. But, I don't know anyone who is using or talking about Gemini. All the chatter seems to be Anthropic vs. OpenAI.
because gemini, despite what stats say, still produces garbage once the problem gets harder. it nails it for lab conditions, but messy reality or creativity or even code quality is a far cry from opus or the latest gpt5.4 by a long shot. and always has been. its pretty good inside the GSuite because of integrations, but standalone its near worthless compared to even grok-code-fast which doesn't think much at all (but…
All this demonstrates how non-sticky all this tech really is. When your product is basically just an API call it’s trivial to just swap you out for someone else. As such it’s unclear what the prize at the end of the present race to the bottom is. We swapped OpenAI out for Claude and it required updating about 15 lines of code. All these guys are just commodity to us. If next week there’s a better supplier of commodit…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> are so evenly matched It's because the real value of the models is in what we (humanity) fed them, and all of them have eaten the same thing for free.
To stop this, I today put most of my Amazon Redshift research web-site behind a basic auth username/password wall. It's all remains free, but you need to email me for a username and password. If I put in time and effort to make content and OpenAI et al copy it and sell it through their LLM such that no one comes to me any more, then plainly it makes no sense for me to create that content; and then it would not exist…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way this thing "looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck" has nothing to do with the way a real duck "looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck". Who cares, as long as the end results are close (or close enough for the uses they are put to)? Besides, "has nothing to do with how the human brain works" is an overstatement. "The term “predictive brain” depicts one of the most r…
The human doesn't just predict. It predicts based upon simulations that it runs. These LLMs do not work like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are missing the correlations that Claude can derive across all these user sessions across all users. In Google analytics, when I visit a page and navigate around till I find what I was looking for or didn't find it, that session data is important for website owners how to optimize. Even in Google search results, when I think on 6th link and not the first, it sends a signal how to rearrange the results next time o…
The underlying technology is a thin layer of queryable knowledge/“memories” in between you and the llm, that in turn gets added to the context of your message to the llm. Likely RAG. It can be as simple as a agents.md that you give it permission to modify as needed. I really don’t think that they are correlating your “memories” with other people’s conversations. There is no way for the LLM to know what is or isn’t ap…
Because your location data, wifi name and etc hones in on the fact this is the same person as before. You are actually supporting my point than denying it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Executives are certainly capable of understanding moral/ethical concerns. Around 2005, a Yale Psychology PhD candidate asked me to write a web-based survey instrument with various questions, some on complex but straight forward business questions (the controls) and others with moral/ethical aspects. Senior executives participated and they answered similarly to rank & file, often completing the entire survey much fast…
You would also need to control for the degree to which people had a stake in the outcome (ie., virtue signalling). Since executives have to make decisions where choosing the moral option may impose an economic (or operational) cost, this requires thinking through the actual choice. Morality for the "rank and file" is just a signalling issue: there's nothing to think through, the answer they are "supposed to choose" i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You would also need to control for the degree to which people had a stake in the outcome (ie., virtue signalling). Since executives have to make decisions where choosing the moral option may impose an economic (or operational) cost, this requires thinking through the actual choice. Morality for the "rank and file" is just a signalling issue: there's nothing to think through, the answer they are "supposed to choose" i…
"Rank and file" employees choosing to prioritize morality very, very frequently pay real costs for doing so - with a much larger personal impact than executives feel.
When making an operational decision that affects the direction of the business, morality is almost always a concern -- even at the level of "do our customers benefit from this vs., do we?" etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Rank and file" employees choosing to prioritize morality very, very frequently pay real costs for doing so - with a much larger personal impact than executives feel.
Only in very rare circumstances where the obvious answer and their procedural work dont align. When making an operational decision that affects the direction of the business, morality is almost always a concern -- even at the level of "do our customers benefit from this vs., do we?" etc.
Meanwhile morality is almost always one of least important factors when making operational decisions.