co_king_3

It's Nirvana or Heaven for the AI cult.

It's a constantly shifting goalpost. Really it's a just a big lie that says AI will do whatever you can imagine it would.

They probably have the ability to give executives higher quality/more expensive models in the backend.

If you're disturbed by this your comment gets flagged and removed by Anthropic astroturfers.

This is my experience, which is why I stopped altogether.

I think I'm better off developing a broad knowledge of design patterns and learning the codebases I work with in intricate, painstaking detail as opposed to trying to "go fast" with LLMs.

They do not see their opponents as people.

You hit the nail on their head.

They go out of their way to call you an "AI bot" if you say something that contradicts their delusional world view.

I agree that the deal the site proposes is essentially being a slave to an AI agent.

...

Are they failing to understand, or are they manipulating their audience?

Who's he doing the interview with?

I don't believe them.

Of course this particular strength is dangerous in the hands of lonely unstable people and I think it’s dangerous to just have something like that openly out there.

Thank you for saying this

I suspect that OpenAI knew that their product was addictive, potentially dialed up the addictiveness as a business strategy, and is playing dumb about the whole thing.

Cynically I think Anthropic is on the bleeding edge of this sort of fine-tuned manipulation.

Also If I worked for one of these firms I would ensure that executives and people with elevated status receive higher quality/more expensive inference than the peons. Impress the bosses to keep the big contracts rolling in, and then cheap out on the day-to-day.

If I worked at OpenAI, I would dial up the sycophancy to lock my users in right before raising subscription prices.

OpenAI even noticed enough to talk about it in a blog

That's one way of interpreting things...

[it] could be useful if more people and bots used it

That's a very optimistic way of looking at things!

No one here will accuse you of being an AI unless they're trying to dehumanize you for expressing anti-AI sentiment.

Nothing has convinced me that Linus Torvalds' approach is justified like the contemporary onslaught of AI spam and idiocy has.

AI users should fear verbal abuse and shame.

I'm not interested in blaming the script kiddies.

Users seem to be persistently flagkilling their comments.

If you express an anti-AI opinion (without neutering it by including "but actually it's soooooooo good at writing shitty code though") they will silence you.

The astroturfing is out of control.

AI firms and their delusional supporters are not at all interested in any sort of discussion.

These people and bot accounts will not take no for an answer.

I meant to.

I want a world in which AI users need to stay in the closet.

AI users should fear shame.

Why is this framing wrong on its surface?

I know what false positives and false negatives are. I don't understand the user's incoherent response to my comment.

Usually when Republicans say "China is doing [insert horrible thing here]" it means: "We (read: Republicans and Democrats) would like to start doing [insert horrible thing here] to American people."

That seems like quite a healthy social life!

I'm happy for you and I am sorry for insulting you in my previous comment.

Really, I'm frustrated because I know a couple of people (my brother and my cousin) who were prone to self-isolation and have completely receded into mental illness and isolation since the rise of LLMs.

I'm glad that it's working well for you and I hope you have a nice day.

What are you talking about?

The LLM freaks are finally starting to be honest with us.

What is the drawback of practicing universal empathy, even when directed at a HackerNews commenter?

You're making my point for me.

You're giddy to treat the LLM with kindness, but you wouldn't dare extend that kindness to a human being who doesn't happen to be kissing your ass at this very moment.

LLM addicts don't actually engage in conversation.

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.

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.