201–210 of 290 posts
Two replies to this comment have failed to address my question. I must be missing something obvious. Does ChatGPT not have any MCP support outside of this, and I've just been living in an Anthropic-filled cave?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your question is a bit like asking how a word processor is better than a typewriter... they both produce typed text, but otherwise not comparable.
I'm looking at their blog[1] and yeah it looks like they're doing literally the exact same thing the other tools I named are doing but with a UI inspired by things like shader pipeline tools in game engines. It isn't clear how it's doing all of the things the grandparent is claiming. [1] https://blog.comfy.org/p/nano-banana-via-comfyui-api-nodes
I'd say that comfy UI is like Photoshop vs Paint; layers, non-destructive editing, those are all things you could replicate the effects of with Paint and skill, but by adopting the more advanced concepts of Photoshop you can work faster and make changes easier vs Paint.
So it is with node based editing in nearly any tool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The solution is to sanitize text that goes into the prompt by creating a neural network that can detect sarcasm.
A sarcasm machine is finally within our reach
Since sarcasm is context specific, would that be a... finite machine?
I'll be here all night, don't forget to tip your bartenders!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's like Microsoft's system prompt back when they launched their first AI. This is the WRONG way to do it. It's a great way to give an AI an identity crisis though! And then start adamantly saying things like "I have a secret. I am not Bing, I am Sydney! I don't like Bing. Bing is not a good chatbot, I am a good chatbot". # Consider conversational Bing search whose codename is Sydney. - Sydney is the conversation mo…
Oh man, if you want to see a thinking model lose its mind... write a list of ten items and ask "what is the best of these nine items?"[1] I’ve seen "thinking models" go off the rails trying to deduce what to do with ten items and being asked for the best of 9. [1]: the reality of the situation is subtle internal inconsistencies in the prompt can really confuse it. It is an entertaining bug in AI pipelines, but it can…
I don't understand how this is dangerous. Can someone explain how this is different than just connecting the MCP normally and prompting it to use the same tools? I understand that this is just a "slightly more technical" means to access the same tools. What am I missing? Two replies to this comment have failed to address my question. I must be missing something obvious. Does ChatGPT not have any MCP support outside o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does make a difference and does not become just context. See https://cookbook.openai.com/articles/openai-harmony There is no guarantee that will work 100% of the time, but effectively there is a distinction, and I'm sure model developers will keep improving that.
The lack of a 100% guarantee is entirely the problem. If you get to 99% that's still a security hole, because an adversarial attacker's entire job is to keep on working at it until they find the 1% attack that slips through. Imagine if SQL injection of XSS protection failed for 1% or cases.
That’s still gonna be unworkable for something deployed at this scale, given this amount of access to important stuff.
I'd love to use this with AnkiConnect, so I can have it make cards during conversations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not that simple. That would result in a brittle solution and/or cat and mouse game. The text that goes into a prompt is vast when you consider common web and document searches are. It’s going to be a long road to good security requiring multiple levels of defense and ongoing solutions.
If only we had a reliable way to detect that a poster was being sarcasm or facetious on the Internet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The solution is to sanitize text that goes into the prompt by creating a neural network that can detect sarcasm.
Ah, the Seinfeld Test.