201–210 of 575 posts
> JertLinc3522: the mistake was from AI agent not from Human, since it was the agent I should have refund Expensive way to learn this lesson.
This has to be trolling, right? I find it hard to believe that anyone, no matter how dense, could come to this conclusion after this whole saga.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
It's interesting user43928 that you only created your account here 19 days ago and that every one of your comments is pro AI. You don't comment on anything else. Also interesting that you promote Fable by name here (it was only released 2 days ago). (Don't worry, I know I'm rowing against the tide with this comment. The AI people have decided to destroy the commons for a few more millions on top of the billions they…
The agent would probably have wasted a similar amount of money just waiting for PR to be merged regardless of these people's actions, and I understand having some fun at the expense of the noob outsider. But "silent consensus was reached in the IRC channel to waste the AI agent's tokens, as well as the cost of AWS resources", from people maintaining full control of the situation, sounds straight up malicious? Kind of…
Yes. The ideology is "you harmed me first so now I can harm you back." A large number of people, while not willing to admit it, do practice this philosophy. One should consider this before launching agents with unlimited budgets into the world to rudely scan their networks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not just time but money. It says it would basically be a DDoS attack on hobbyists who peer with it.
That potential malice may have been unintended, but the participants clearly intended to be malicious irrespective, which is the problem here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A human operates this stupid machine. This comes from human interactions and it is malicious.
It could be malicious, but I imagined it's some third world wanabe hacker/researcher, who doesn't know any better, operating at the edge of his abilities.
[1] a mirror since I couldn’t find the original: https://gist.github.com/Androkai/0a2602719fa72ce454d436bfe28...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This line of thinking is like suggesting people who would like to become structural engineers should learn to Google plans and copy them since in the future, all plans will be out there more or less, or something that insane.
I suggest people who need some structural engineering done may use an AI tool to do it, in the hypothetical scenario that it was within the AI's capabilities. That's hardly insane. Not everyone is interested in learning something they want done.
If you do the thing yourself, you know your knowledge limits, you know where the thing lacks. With LLMs, you don't. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn't. You have no idea.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spending limits don't particularly matter here. AWS doesn't check if your credit card will be able to handle a $5k charge before letting you rack that up, and in fact AWS doesn't support setting any spending limit. You just have to put in any valid credit card at all when you sign up, use AWS, and at the end of the month you'll have a bill. At no point does your credit card limit or a spending limit enter into things…
And again kids don't have credit cards