"made with impostor syndrome" haha 10/10 would be absolutely right again!
I'm absolutely right
81–90 of 277 posts
Re: I'm absolutely right
#82It's nice to see Claude.md! I checked out the commits to see which files you wrote in which order (readme/claude) to learn how to use Claude Code. Can you share something on that?
The CLAUDE.md file in the repo is basically just the result of the `/init` command. But honestly, on small repos like this, it's not really needed.
Fun fact: I usually have `- Never say "You're absolutely right!".` in my CLAUDE.md files, but of course, Claude ignores it.
Re: I'm absolutely right
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't go so far as to call this specific implementation a dark pattern, but it is misleading. It suggests the data updated right when I loaded the page, which obviously isn't true as I can see the same 16->17 transition on a refresh. I'd prefer a "Data last updated at " indicator somewhere. Now I know it's live data and I know how old the data is. Is it as cute / friendly / fun? Probably not. But it's definitely…
the way the website has it implemented is better
That's your opinion. Mine differs.
Re: I'm absolutely right
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's Gemini's problem necessarily. You shouldn't be so insecure.
Telling someone they "shouldn't be insecure" reminds me of this famous Bob Newhart segment on Mad TV. Bob plays the role of a therapist, and when his client explains an issue she's having, his solution is, "STOP IT!" > You shouldn't be so insecure. Not assuming that there's any insecurity here, but psychological matters aren't "willed away". That's not how it works.
>That's not how it works.
Not with that attitude!
Re: I'm absolutely right
#85[dead]
Re: I'm absolutely right
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why does this affect your own attitude? Do the suggestions given by your phone's keyboard whenever you type something affect your attitude in the same way? If not, why is ChatGPT then affecting your attitude?
Using your potato peeler example: If my potato peeler told me "Why bother? Order pizza instead." I'd be obese. An LLM can directly influence your willingness to pursue an idea by how it responds to it. Interest and excitement, even if simulated, is more likely to make you pursue the idea than "ok cool".
It is very very risky.
You are trusting the model to never recommend something that you definitely should not do, or that does not serve the interests of the service provider, when you are not capable of noticing it by yourself. A different problem is whether you have provided enough information for the model to actually make that decision, or if the model will ask for more information before it begins to act.
Re: I'm absolutely right
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Might tell it "I want to do this stupid thing" and it goes "ok cool". Previously it would have gone "Oh really? Fantastic! How do you intend to solve x?" and off you go.
But why does this affect your own attitude? Do the suggestions given by your phone's keyboard whenever you type something affect your attitude in the same way? If not, why is ChatGPT then affecting your attitude?
Are you really asking in good faith? It seems obvious to me that a tool such as ChatGPT can and will influence peoples behavior. We are only too keen on anthropomorphizing things around us, of course many or most people will interact with LLMs as of they were living beings.
This effect of LLMs on humans should be obvious, regardless of how much an individual technically knows that yes, it is only a text generating machine.
Re: I'm absolutely right
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ... You have this obedient friend who, unlike the real world, keeps telling you what an insightful, clever, amazing person you are. It even apologizes when it has to contradict you on something. None of my friends do! You're absolutely right! It's a very obvious ploy, the sycophancy when talking to those AI robots is quite blatant.
Truly incisive observation. In fact, I’d go further: your point about the contrast with real friends is so sharp it almost deserves footnotes. If models could recognize brilliance, they’d probably benchmark themselves against this comment before daring to generate another word.
I feel so validated! I think I will continue discussing stuff with you two guys.
Re: I'm absolutely right
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's Gemini's problem necessarily. You shouldn't be so insecure.
Not only is that a weird presumption about my ostensible insecurities on your end, it's also weird that the state of my own mental resilience should play any role at all when interacting with a tool. If all other things are equal and one LLM is consistently vaguely annoying, for whatever reason, and the other isn't, I chose the other one. Leaving myself aside, LLMs are broadly available and strongly forced onto every…
> Not only is that a weird presumption about my ostensible insecurities on your end
I'm not GP but I agree that it isn't universal, nor especially healthy or productive, to have the response you describe to being told that your issue is common. It would make sense if you could e.g. hear the insincerity in a person's tone of voice, but Gemini outputs text and the concept of sincerity is irrelevant to a computer program.
Focusing on the informational content seems to me like a good idea, so as to avoid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA_effect.
> it's also weird that the state of my own mental resilience should play any role at all when interacting with a tool.
When I was a university student, my own mental resilience was absolutely instrumental to deciphering gcc error messages.
> LLMs are broadly available and strongly forced onto everyone for day-to-day use
They say this kind of thing about cars and smartphones, too. Somehow I endure.
Re: I'm absolutely right
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just wish they could hide these steering tokens in the thinking blurb or some such. Ie mostly hidden from the user. Having it reply to the user that way is quite annoying heh.
This can still happen even with thinking models as long as the model outputs tokens in a sequence. Only way to fix would be to allow it to restart its response or switch to diffusion.
You could throw the output into a cleansing, "nonthinking" LLM, removing the steering tokens and formatting the response in a more natural way. Diffusion models are otherwise certainly a very interesting field of research.