Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Gabrys1's commentslogin

Makes it easier to parse by automatic tools too

I would say, the proper response to this question is not "walk, blablablah" but rather "What do you mean? You need to drive your car to have it washed. Did I miss anything?"

Yes, this is what irks me about all the chatbots, and the chat interface as a whole. It is a chat-like UX without a chat-like experience. Like you are talking to a loquacious autist about their favorite topic every time.

Just ask me a clarifying question before going into your huge pitch. Chats are a back & forth. You don’t need to give me a response 10x longer than my initial question. Etc


I think for "GPT-4o is my life partner" reasons, labs are a little bit icey about making the models overly human.

Doubt. The labs are afraid of users becoming too hooked on their products? lol…

People offing themselves because their lover convinced them it's time is absolutely not worth the extra addiction potential. We even witnessed this happen with OAI.

It's a fast track to public disdain and heavy handed government regulation.


Regulation would be preferable for OpenAI to the tort lawyers. In general the LLM companies should want regulation because the alternative is tort, product liability tort, and contract law.

There is no way without the protections that could be afforded by regulation to offer such wide-ranging uses of the product without also accepting significant liability. If the range of "foreseeable misuse" is very broad and deep, so is the possible liability. If your marketing says that the bot is your lawyer, doctor, therapist, and spouse in one package, how is one to say that the company can escape all the comprehensive duties that attach to those social roles. Courts will weigh the tiny and inconspicuous disclaimers against the very large and loud marketing claims.

The companies could protect themselves in ways not unlike the ways in which the banking industry protects itself by replacing generic duties with ones defined by statute and regulation. Unless that happens, lawyers will loot the shareholders.


It’s funny seeing you frame regulation as needed to protect trillion dollar monopolies from consumers and not the other way around.

Or sama is just waiting to premium subscription gate companions in some adult content package as he has hinted something along these lines may be forthcoming. Maybe tie it in with the hardware device Ive is working on. Some sort of hellscape tamogotchi.

Recall: "As part of our 'treat adult users like adults' principle, we will allow even more, like erotica for verified adults," Altman wrote in the Oct.


I'm struggling a bit when it comes to wording this with social decorum, but how long do we reckon it takes until there's AI powered adult toys? There's a market opportunity that i do not want to see being fulfilled, ever..

I did work on a supervised fine-tuning project for one of the major providers a while back, and the documentation for the project was exceedingly clear about the extent to which they would not tolerate the model responding as if it was a person.

Some of the labs might be less worried about this, but they're not by any means homogenous.


> Like you are talking to a loquacious autist about their favorite topic every time

That's the best part.


People need to touch grass

People need to smoke grass and chill out.

With ChatGPT, at least, you can tell the bot to work that way using [persistent] Custom Instructions, if that's what you want. These aren't obeyed perfectly (none of the instructions are, AFAICT), but they do influence behavior.

A person can even hammer out an unstructured list of behavioral gripes, tell the bot to organize them into instructional prose, have it ask clarifying questions and revise based on answers, and produce directions for integrating them as Custom Instructions.

From then on, it will invisibly read these instructions into context at the beginning of each new chat.

Mold it and steer it to be how you want it to be.

(My own bot tends to be very dry, terse, non-presumptuous, pragmatic, and profane. It's been years now since it has uttered an affirmation like "That's a great idea!" or "Wow! My circuits are positively buzzing with the genius I'm seeing here!" or produced a tangential dissertation in response to a simple question. But sometimes it does come back with functional questions, or phrasing like "That shit will never work. Here's why.")


This. Nailed it.

>You don’t need to give me a response 10x longer than my initial question.

Except, of course, when that is exactly what the user wants.


To me that’s not a chat interface, that’s a search interface.

Chat is a back & forth.

Search is a one-shot.


For this purpose, I think it would be nice to access the raw data, to see any errors that would be otherwise masked. As someone in the comments suggested, one might compare number of corrected errors in 1, 2, 5 years and compare to the number of redundant bits stored to estimate the expected longevity of the medium

dvdisaster might already be able to do this analysis.

calc(1.42 * 100vmax)

is the same as

142vmax

Just saying :-)


What if someone unironically wants to automatically click all the ads to support the websites they visit


You'd be doing way more harm than good. The battle between ad networks and unscrupulous website owners using bots to fake ad clicks has been going on forever.


Some sort of Robinhood of advertising, taking from the big, to give to the small


Ads pay in different forms. Some pay per click (PPC), some pay per thousand impressions (CPM).

Clicking with the intention of helping doesn't help. Only clicking with genuine interest helps.


I don't think the question was about whether this would actually help the advertisers. (I suspect it was rhetorical.) Of course the defense will now be harder to execute for anyone who reads this thread.


Visa/Mastercard take like 1 or 2%. That's why they cannot compare to Apple...


If they tried to take significantly more, cash would be a lot more popular.

Yet Apple can get away with taking 30% and companies still accept this and push their apps rather than websites.


> Yet Apple can get away with taking 30% and companies still accept this and push their apps rather than websites.

companies and users!


Visa/MasterCard take like 0.3% the rest of the interchange fee goes to the issuing and acquiring banks.


We just got layers and layers of entrenched middlemen (middle corporations) everywhere


if your data isn't mostly read-only, then you're going to have an issue with SQLite. It doesn't nicely support parallel writers


then, you would automate that


defaults matter a lot!


Developers change defaults all the time and make things far worse.

Vim 9.0 default changes required a 6 line vimrc to undo the damage.


Yes, that's the primary reason that made me switch to neovim instead.


> Mac and Linux: Search for the Terminal in your applications list and open it. Next, copy the below command, paste it into the window (Ctrl+V or Cmd+V), and press the Enter/Return key:

Should be Ctrl+Shift+V


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: