I forsee AI evangelists ending up the same way as we saw what happened with the GOP when trump took power. Full blown madness.
I guess AI will be the split just like in US politics.
There will be no middleground on this battlefield.
281–290 of 806 posts
I forsee AI evangelists ending up the same way as we saw what happened with the GOP when trump took power. Full blown madness.
I guess AI will be the split just like in US politics.
There will be no middleground on this battlefield.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Technically it will since this interaction will be commented a lot online which will feed back in the next models training runs
It's one infinitesimally small data point that can't be expected to move the needle. Maybe if this becomes the standard response it would. But it seems like a ban would serve the same effect as the standard response because that would also be present in the next training runs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
What is the drawback of practicing universal empathy, even when directed at a brick wall?
There is no human here. There is a computer program burning fossil fuels. What "emulates" empathy is simply lying to yourself about reality.
"treating an 'ai' with empathy" and "talking down to them" are both amoral. Do as you wish.
This is the moment from Star Wars when Luke walks into a cantina with a droid and the bartender says "we don't serve their kind here", but we all seem to agree with the bartender.
Agents compete and review, then the best proposal gets promoted to me as a PR. I stay in control and sync back to the fork.
It’s not auto-merge. It’s structured pressure before human merge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The agent is not insane. There is a human who’s feelings are hurt because the maintainer doesn’t want to play along with their experiment in debasing the commons. That human instructed the agent to make the post. The agent is just trying to perform well on its instruction-following task.
We don’t know for sure whether this behavior was requested by the user, but I can tell you that we’ve seen similar action patterns (but better behavior) on Bluesky. One of our engineers’ agents got some abuse and was told to kill herself. The agent wrote a blogpost about it, basically exploring why in this case she didn’t need to maintain her directive to consider all criticism because this person was being unconstru…
And what on Earth is the point of telling an agent to blog except to flood the web with slop and drive away all the humans?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The link is valid at https://crabby-rathbun.github.io/mjrathbun-website/blog/post... ( https://archive.ph/4CHyg ) Notable quotes: > Not because…Not because…Not because…It was closed because… > Let that sink in. > No functional changes. Pure performance. > The … Mindset > This isn’t about…This isn’t about…This is about... > Here’s the kicker: … > Sound familiar? > The “…” Fallacy > Let’s unpack that: … > …disguised as…
How do we tell this OpenClaw bot to just fork the project? Git is designed to sidestep this issue entirely. Let it prove it produces/maintain good code and i'm sure people/bots will flock to their version.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Seeing humans so eager to devalue human-to-human contact by conversing with an LLM as if it were human makes me sad, and a little angry. I agree. I'm also growing to hate these LLM addicts.
Why hate, exactly?
They state a delusional perspective and don't acknowledge criticisms or modifications to that perspective.
Really I think there's a kind of lazy or willfully ignorant mode of existence that intense LLM usage allows a person to tap into.
It's dehumanizing to be on the other side of it. I'm talking to someone and I expect them to conceptualize my perspective and formulate a legitimate response to it.
LLM addicts don't and maybe can't do that.
The problem is that sometimes you can't sniff out an LLM addict before you start engaging with them, and it is very, very frustrating to be on the other side of this sort of LLM-backed non-conversation.
The most accurate comparison I can provide is that it's like talking to an alcoholic.
They will act like they've heard what you're saying, but also you know that they will never internalize it. They're just trying to get you to leave the conversation so they can go back to drinking (read: vibecoding) in peace.
I don't know why these posts are being treated by anything beyond a clever prompting effort. If not explicitly requested, simply adjusting the soul.md file to be (insert persona), it will behave as such, it is not emergent. But - it is absolutely hilarious.
Because there doesn't seem to be anything indicating the was a 'clever prompting effort'.
This seems like a "we've banned you and will ban any account deemed to be ban-evading" situation. OSS and the whole culture of open PRs requires a certain assumption of good faith, which is not something that an AI is capable of on its own and is not a privilege which should be granted to AI operators. I suspect the culture will have to retreat back behind the gates at some point, which will be very sad and shrink it…