381–390 of 664 posts
Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them. Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
So why didn't this happen with electricity, water and food, but would with thinking capacity?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anthropic has been flying by the seat of their pants for a while now and it shows across the board. From the terminal flashing bug that’s been around for months to the lack of support to instabilities in Claude mobile and Code for the web (I get 10-20% message failure rates on the former and 5-10% on CC for web). They’re growing too fast and it’s bursting the seams of the company. If there’s ever a correction in the…
You are giving me images from The Bug Short where the guy goes to investigate mortgages and knocks on some random person’s door to ask about a house/mortgage just to learn that it belongs to a dog. Imagine finding out that Anthropic employs no humans at all. Just an AI that has fired everyone and been working on its own releases and press releases since.
At least it did not turn against them physically... "get comfortable while I warm up the neurotoxin emitters"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i read the related parts of the linked file in the repo, and it took me a while to find your comment here again to reply to. Are you saying that the failure modes of claude with "coding" webapps or whatever OP was doing? i originally thought it might have meant like... jailbreak. But having read it, i assume you meant the former, as we both read the same thing and it seemed like a series of admonitions to the LLM, wr…
I'm not saying he did anything wrong. I'm saying I can see how Anthropic's automated systems might have flagged & banned the account b/c one of the heuristics they probably use is that there should be no short feedback loops where outputs of Claude are fed back into inputs. So basically Anthropic tracks all calls to their API & they have some heuristics for going through the history & then assigning scores based on w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
virtually anything can become a bomb if you can aerosolize it. even beef jerky, i wager.
You can also die from eating 10,000 pounds of beef jerky, but that doesn't mean that it's as dangerous to eat as arsenic.
or places that mill anything that don't clean their rafters, who then get a tool crashing into a work piece, which shakes the building, which throws all the dust into the air, which is then sparked off by literally anything. like low humidity.
see also another example; Domino Sugar explosion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any clue why you might be a favored/favoured high value user?
The entire conversation is fed in as context effectively compounding your token usage over the course of a session. Sessions are most efficient when used for one task only.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm curious if anyone has logged the number of thinking tokens over time. My implication was the "thinking/reasoning" modes are a way for LLM providers to put their thumb on the scale for how much the service costs. they get to see (if not opted-out) your context, idea, source code , etc. and in return you give them $220 and they give you back "out of tokens"
> My implication was the "thinking/reasoning" modes are a way for LLM providers to put their thumb on the scale for how much the service costs. I've done RL training on small local models, and there's a strong correlation between length of response and accuracy. The more they churn tokens, the better the end result gets. I actually think that the hyper-scalers would prefer to serve shorter answers. A token generated…
i'd need to see real numbers. I can trigger a thinking model to generate hundreds of tokens and return a 3 word response (however many tokens that is), or switch to a non-thinking model of the same family that just gives the same result. I don't necessarily doubt your experience, i just haven't had that experience tuning SD, for example; which is also xformer based
I'm sure there's some math reason why longer context = more accuracy; but is that intrinsic to transformer-based LLMs? that is, per your thought that the 'scalers want shorter responses, do you think they are expending more effort to get shorter, equivalent accuracy responses; or, are they trying to find some other architecture or whatever to overcome the "limitations" of the current?
I am really confused as to what happened here. The use of ‘disabled organization’ to refer to the author made it extra confusing. I think I kind of have an idea what the author was doing, but not really.
You're not alone. I think the author was doing some sort of circular prompt injection between two instances of Claude? The author claims "I'm just scaffolding a project" but that doesn't appear to be the case, or what resulted in the ban...