sureMan6

Who's most people? What are you talking about? Most people here use agents every day and I wouldn't trust flash or pro to touch any important project of mine because they're both terrible compared to the competition, waste of time every time I give them a chance

Also creates a confusion that algorithm profiteers love, where before you could know a post you saw would be page 1 today and page 2 tomorrow now the homepage of every app is absolute chaos so you have to spend hours searching for something specific or you're just always seeing exactly what they want you to see (to increase engagement or whatever instead of any sensible order)

Gonna try to monetise it or open source it?

Might bother you to use anthropomorphic terminology like smart and learning but they are capable of producing work that traditionally required human intelligence and the whole point of gpt 3 was the ability to "learn", you can give it an example of an invented brand new coding language and it can write working code in that language

You completely misunderstanding the comment feels like an AI trigger

You have to find people you value, then it'll feel worth it

Goalpost moving > No one said this > They said this > Ok but why did you believe them

If you're a European AI lab and you see you can't compete with the Amerikans on compute or spending, and the Chinese are open sourcing their LLM work and keeping the Amerikans honest, then there's no real need for you to focus on LLMs

Yeah I don't get the user who said Gemini is generous with the quota, I get more use out of codex with the 5 hour limits than Gemini gives me in a week

I've lived in Sweden, it's real

The pro LLM rant is weird, LLMs "hallucinate" in creating detailed elaborate lies, the frontier models still do this egregiously, an LLM written article by default has 0 value since every single line could be true or it could be a convincingly crafted lie, every line has to be fact checked

I'm using Gemini 3.1 pro to help me research my thesis, it still with search enabled and on pro mode, invents entire papers that don't exist, and lies about the contents of existing papers to relate them to the context or to appease me, if I submitted an LLM written article based on the results its given me 80% of the article would be lies

Commenting to complain that the article is LLM written is helpful too since some people aren't able to distinguish

That's very funny to have my exact reaction present in the first comment, I was thinking "that's turquoise" but I do also feel like turquoise is green, like you'd call the Copenhagen copper domes green, and the word verdigris comes from green

For sure an AI write up

Overhired has nothing to do with the talent pool and just means they hired more than they actually needed or wanted, if the talent pool is large enough then everyone can overhire

A new user is much more likely to scan the codebase and report vulnerabilities so they can be fixed than illegally exploit them since most people aren't criminals

This article is LLM written and unsourced so the entire thing could be a hallucination and there's no reason to trust any claim made in it, don't even read it

Not really incompetence if he hasn't looked at the article

Another solution is to make software makers responsible and liable for the output of their products. It's long been a problem that there is little legal responsibility, but we shouldn't just accept it. If Ford makes exploding cars, they are liable. If OpenAI makes software that endangers people, it should be the same.

That kind of thinking is exactly why LLMs are so censored, because people think OAI should be liable if someone uses chatgpt to commit cyber crimes

How about cyber crimes are already illegal and we just punish whoever uses the new tools to commit crimes instead of holding the tool maker liable

This gets complex if LLMs enable children to commit complex crimes but that's different from just outright restricting the tool for everyone because someone might misuse it

I bought a used Samsung and it started boot looping almost immediately, all these issues seem very specific to Samsung

I opt into it on my site it's just a login option you can ignore if you want to log in another way, but for those who use it it removes the friction of writing out a password and verifying the email

Checking what the school is exposing the children to is part of parenting, if enough parents demand parental controls on the iPad you'd get that. Also it sounds insane that any school is given children iPads, if anything the studies show worse outcomes with iPads

everyone is using AI for copyediting now aren't they?

If the studies that say that humans prefer AI writers are to be believed then you'd be a fool not to

I believe it's already a solved problem especially with base models (pre RL) but they still push the LLM voice either to make it easy to identify or because they think it's likeable, so it's not that OAI, anthropic, Google can't get rid of the assistant voice it's that they don't want to

No swyping and no autocorrect make it DOA

The entire thing is mostly AI written transparently

Either op mistakes the hallucinated citations for the authors (most likely, although there's almost no "middle eastern names" among them) Or he checked some that do have the names listed (I found 4, all had either Chinese names or "western" names) Anyway the great majority of papers (good or bad) I've seen have Indian or Chinese names attached, attributing bad papers to brown people having an inferior culture is just blatantly racist