531–540 of 998 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much is the real (non-subsidized) cost of the "paid" plans? Does anyone in the world have an answer for this?
Also interested in this - the kWh figures people talk about do not match the price of the subscriptions
``` Drive. The car needs to be at the car wash. ```
Gemini Thinking gives me 3-4 options. Do X if you're going to wash yourself. Do Y if you're paying someone. Do Z if some other random thing it cooked up. And then asks me whether I want to check whether the weather in my city is nice today so that a wash doesn't get dirtied up by rain.
Funnily enough, both have the exact same personal preferences/instructions. Claude follows them almost all the time. Gemini has its own way of doing things, and doesn't respect my instructions.
I wonder if the providers are doing everyone, themselves included, a huge disservice by providing free versions of their models that are so incompetent compared to the SOTA models that these types of q&a go viral because the ai hype doesn't match the reality for unpaid users. And it's not just the viral questions that are an issue. I've seen people getting sub-optimal results for $1000+ PC comparisons from the free r…
> a senior scientist at a national lab thinking ai isn't really useful because the free reasoning version couldn't generate working code I would question if such a scientist should be doing science, it seems they have serious cognitive biases
If all one uses is the free thinking model their conclusion about its capability is perfectly valid because nowhere is it clearly specified that the 'free, thinking' model is not as capable as the 'paid, thinking ' model, Even the model numbers are the same. And given that the highest capability LLMs are closed source and locked behind paywalls, there is no means to arrive at a contrary verifiable conclusion. They are a scientist, after all.
And that's a real problem. Why pay when you think you're getting the same thing for free. No one wants yet another subscription. This unclear marking is going to lead to so many things going wrong over time; what would be the cumulative impact?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> so you need to tell them the specifics That is the entire point, right? Us having to specify things that we would never specify when talking to a human. You would not start with "The car is functional. The tank is filled with gas. I have my keys." As soon as we are required to do that for the model to any extend that is a problem and not a detail (regardless that those of us, who are familiar with the matter, do bu…
> Us having to specify things that we would never specify when talking to a human. The first time I read that question I got confused: what kind of question is that? Why is it being asked? It should be obvious that you need your car to wash it. The fact that it is being asked in my mind implies that there is an additional factor/complication to make asking it worthwhile, but I have no idea what. Is the car already at…
In a real human to human conversation, you wouldn’t simply blurt out the first thing that comes to mind. Instead, you’d ask questions.
Another good one[0] that LLMs (and most humans) can't get without prodding: > I have one glass coin. Each time I flip the coin, there's a 10% chance it breaks. After 100 flips, what are the chances the coin survived? https://xcancel.com/itsandrewgao/status/2021390093836222724
I can't see what's wrong with that answer. What should the answer be?
LLM failures go viral because they trigger a "Schadenfreude" response to automation anxiety. If the oracle can't do basic logic, our jobs feel safe for another quarter. Wrong.
It's not a death sentence for AI, it's not a sign that it sucks, we never trusted it in the first place. It's just a powerful tool, and it needs to be used carefully. How many times do we have to go over this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A modern LLMs corpora is every piece of human writing ever produced.
Not really, but even if it would be true, I don't think humans ever explained to each other why do you need to drive to car wash even if it's 50 meters away. It's pretty obvious and intuitive.
It's then up to the model to make the connection "At the car wash people wash their car -> to wash your car you need your car to be present -> if you drive there your call will be there"
I wonder if the providers are doing everyone, themselves included, a huge disservice by providing free versions of their models that are so incompetent compared to the SOTA models that these types of q&a go viral because the ai hype doesn't match the reality for unpaid users. And it's not just the viral questions that are an issue. I've seen people getting sub-optimal results for $1000+ PC comparisons from the free r…
Claude told me: "Walk! At 25 meters, you'd barely get the car started before you arrived. It's faster and easier on foot — plus you avoid the awkwardness of driving a dirty car just a few seconds down the road."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Us having to specify things that we would never specify when talking to a human. The first time I read that question I got confused: what kind of question is that? Why is it being asked? It should be obvious that you need your car to wash it. The fact that it is being asked in my mind implies that there is an additional factor/complication to make asking it worthwhile, but I have no idea what. Is the car already at…
That’s why I don’t understand why LLMs don’t ask clarifying questions more often. In a real human to human conversation, you wouldn’t simply blurt out the first thing that comes to mind. Instead, you’d ask questions.