401–410 of 560 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is anecdotal but I've seen massive personality shifts from GPT5 over the past week or so of using it
That's probably because it's actually multiple models under the hood, with some kind of black box combining them.
"Prioritize substance, clarity, and depth. Challenge all my proposals, designs, and conclusions as hypotheses to be tested. Sharpen follow-up questions for precision, surfacing hidden assumptions, trade offs, and failure modes early. Default to terse, logically structured, information-dense responses unless detailed exploration is required. Skip unnecessary praise unless grounded in evidence. Explicitly acknowledge uncertainty when applicable. Always propose at least one alternative framing. Accept critical debate as normal and preferred. Treat all factual claims as provisional unless cited or clearly justified. Cite when appropriate. Acknowledge when claims rely on inference or incomplete information. Favor accuracy over sounding certain. When citing, please tell me in-situ, including reference links. Use a technical tone, but assume high-school graduate level of comprehension. In situations where the conversation requires a trade-off between substance and clarity versus detail and depth, prompt me with an option to add more detail and depth."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have learnt to not ask leading questions. Always phrase questions in a neutral way and ask for pro/con analysis of each option.
But then it makes an obvious mistake and you correct it and it says "you are absolutely right". Which is fine for that round but you start doubting whether its just sycophancy.
This applies to so many AIs. I don't want a bubbly sycophant. I don't want a fake personality or an anime avatar. I just want a helpful assistant. I also don't get wanting to talk to an AI. Unless you are alone, that's going to be irritating for everyone else around.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm more reminded of Tom Scott's talk at the Royal Institution "There is no Algorithm for Truth"[0]. A lot of what you're talking about is the ability to detect Truth, or even truth! [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leX541Dr2rU
> I'm more reminded of Tom Scott's talk at the Royal Institution "There is no Algorithm for Truth"[0]. Isn't there? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomonoff%27s_theory_of_induc...
This seems to be baked into our reality/universe. So many duals like this. God always wins because He has stacked the cards and there ain't nothing anyone can do about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LLMs definitely have personalities. And changing ones at that. gemini free tier was great for a few days but lately it keeps gaslighting me even when it is wrong (which has become quite often on the more complex tasks). To the point I am considering going back to claude. I am cheating on my llms. :D edit: I realize now and find important to note that I haven't even considered upping the gemini tier. I probably should…
I had a weird bug in elixir code and agent kept adding more and more logging (it could read loads from running application). Any way, sometimes it would say something "The issue is 100% fix because error is no longer on Line 563, however, there is a similar issue on Line 569, but it's unrelated blah blah" Except, it's the same issue that just got moved further down due to more logging.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a childrearing technique, too: say “please do X”, where X precludes Y, rather than saying “please don’t do Y!”, which just increases the salience, and therefore likelihood, of Y.
Don't put marbles in your nose https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpz67hBIJwg
Put them in there
Do not put them in there
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"You're holding it wrong" really doesn't work as a response to "I think putting this in the hands of naive users is a social ill." Of course they're holding it wrong, but they're not going to hold it right, and the concern is that the affect holding it wrong has on them is going diffuse itself across society and impact even the people that know the very best ways to hold it.
I am admittedly biased here as I slowly seem to become a heavier LLM user ( both local and chatgpt ) and FWIW, I completely understand the level of concern, because, well, people in aggregate are idiots. Individuals can be smart, but groups of people? At best, it varies. Still, is the solution more hand holding, more lock-in, more safety? I would argue otherwise. As scary as it may be, it might actually be helpful, d…
If it’s like 5 people this is happening to then yea, but it’s seeming more and more like a percentage of the population and we as a society have found it reasonable to regulate goods and services with that high a rate of negative events