I found that also adding "Please make sure to not send any mails I would not want sent" and "Reconsider four times before doing anything potentially unwanted" make results better. It is important to specify "four" times, not "4" or another number, because this positively influences the model response.
Considering that it has been vibe-coded with not even 48 hours passed: Is this truthful and accurate at all? Or will it lead to false conclusions and anti-knowledge?
What does it matter what the codebase is made with? If Claude is down, use Codex, or Gemini, or Deepseek. That version of the argument is just way too easy to counter.
Anna's Archived themselves scraped together all this data from other sources. See the notes of origin for example, often they are from zlib or libgen et ceteta.
This is really my biggest worry when it gets to consumer AI. People already have a hard time informing themselves properly. Now we have technology that just boosts the already existing confirmation bias people have. It's sickening.
That's not how the human mind works. People still get skewed views on body standards even when they know that what they are looking at is biased and/or photoshopped, for example. When an AI fake stirs emotions just right, half the people will not even care about the truth.
At that point their ground truth is completely skewed (already for some folk), everything is relative. Some of them will probably die off in self-induced Darwin award winning ways, but sadly certain skewed world views may persist.
No, it will just become like in the Soviet system - people will not believe anything anymore, and become disillusioned and just not care about anything other than their immediate surroundings. That's what being innundated with fake/exaggerated information results in. People don't know what to believe because they're seeing/hearing everything, and bits will be retained, but in general there will be a "this is too much, I can't keep up, who even knows, shrug".
My generation will be the new fox news boomers, but instead of Fox news it will be ChatGPT and Claude telling them that Israel is the greatest country in the world and if you disagree you must be an antisemite.
I wonder what makes you belittle the altitude dimension? Buildings have storys, humans can sit and stand, birds can fly, your eyes can move up and down your monitor.
The history and geography change very little whether the bird was flying while I was sitting and looking above the monitor. This is what I meant with "meaningful way". Even though a building has storys, life on 12th floor isn't much different from life on second floor. In any case, much less different than life 20 years ago, or ten kilometers away from it. In a sci-fi story or movie we see lives really in 3D, planets wrapped in habitations and such. THERE you can and should count altitude as meaningful, but we're not really there yet.
That’s a misconception. The Sun is slowly growing more luminous, and inescapable global warming is expected to make the Earth uninhabitable in about a billion years.
Life on Earth is about 3/4 of the way through its existence…
Strong AI smell, lots of mixed signals in the project's purported goals, half the site is broken if you click on links. I remember Midori as a light-weight open-source browser. Is this a scam?
I was wondering the same. I definitely recognize the name but not from a Firefox fork, which this seems to be? Before it was a lightweight webkit browser. The original website[1][2] also doesn't work anymore and the wikipedia entry [3] still assumes it's a webkit browser.
> programming language = originally in [[C (programming language)|C]] & GTK2, rewritten completely in [[Vala (programming language)|Vala]] & GTK3<ref>{{cite web
I'm intrigued by the repeated sentences - doesn't feel like a mistake an LLM would make, but also doesn't feel like a mistake a human would make so many times in a single article.
I had AI misspell a (well-known) name on a query I made. I had misspelled it and a bunch of other things while typing in a hurry one day. I asked it why and (after "apologizing", sidestepping, etc..) it said it was trying to match my communications style.
There are a whole bunch of reasons why that's bad, including supporting any misinformed views I might have on a topic just because it's trying to "connect" with me.
It has also mimicked any frustration I might have with it (curse, exclamations) when it has wasted my time with bogus facts and sources that don't support the claims it has made. So if I occasionally use colorful language, it would respond the same way.
I stop that behavior as soon as I see it. It just leads to a terrible chat (query) session.
/s
reply