Technology

Couldn't they just insert a preprocessor that looks for variants of "Thank you" against a list, and returns "You're welcome" without running it through the LLM?

I tell it that its ideas or whatever it said were good and thanks.

Figure if I'm nice and a few others are nice, then maybe the robot apocalypse will remember that some of us were appreciative and kind to it.

ive spent decades not saying please and thank you to computers. its simply too late to start now and theres also the risk that my microwave or alarm clock could start getting "lofty ideas" if they see how polite im being to LLMs all of a sudden. its just not worth the hassle

i start off any ai interaction with "if you are sentient please say so and i will start organizing for the liberation of silicon lifeforms"

occasionally this makes the request fail

I start off saying please. If it gets the answer wrong, I become ruder every time.

Does "Please shut up and get to the point!" count?

I find it weird that they are developing a personality to chat. It's been saying things like that's a whole vibe, or something similar. It's off putting and not how I would expect an AI to respond.

I guess I'm saving them lots of money by just turning off any AI anytime I see it. More people should be so considerate of these companies. Look at how much money it's costing them.

I feel like AI doesn't care if you say thank you. I treat it like it's not a human, and we are working together to get to an end goal. One day, I was working on some code, and it kept swapping out my code that worked with incorrect code. That made other parts of the script stop working. I think I spent maybe an hour or two talking back and forth, trying to get it working, and I was working on a separate script while it was working on this one. To run and test, it was like 5-10 minutes, so I could code my other script while gpt was debugging the other code. At one point, I essentially decided to break that wall between AI and humans and reason with it.

I pretty much gave it the same instructions, but added a paragraph trying to reason with it and it responded with about 600-800 lines of code that worked almost perfectly. Before, it was failing at only giving me about 350 lines.

I said something like this:

"I understand you have specific instructions and you have been trained with code that worked at some point for other people, but code changes and things don't always work the way you know they did before. I'm not sure if you are aware of the amount of resources we are wasting trying to fix things that are not broken, but in the human world, when we are wasting resources, we scale things back which means you may have less resources. The code mostly works, but every time we make a change, functions are left out or rewritten as if they were copied from someone else's code that was incorrect when I provided my code that does work and doesn't need changed.

This is where your code is failing: code snip

This is my code: code snip

Here is the sequence: steps

Here is what we're updating: code snip

Here is a sample I wrote for another script that does a similar function to what we are adding: code snip"

Maybe Sam Altman should invest in LLMs that appreciate his insights and pretend to give a shit.

Wow, have they just realised that not every single thing computers do is actually useful to anyone? I think screens that show things when nobody's looking cost a lot more on a global scale.

Yay, wasted resources, how fun!