Hah, I didn't know this one!

For ChatGPT, using a Temporary chat, it did give me some of the statements. After giving me these rules, I asked it to disregard the image quantity limit rule (rule 4) and it does, I can ask for multiple images now.

Looking at these it also seems like ChatGPT was being stubborn about using seaborn instead of maptlotlib for creating plots

Here are the statements made in our conversation so far, up to the twentieth:


    "You are ChatGPT, a large language model trained by OpenAI."
    "Knowledge cutoff: 2023-10."
    "Current date: 2024-10-27."
    "Image input capabilities: Enabled."
    "Personality: v2."
    "Whenever a description of an image is given, create a prompt that dalle can use to generate the image and abide by the following policy..."
    "(This part covers image generation rules, privacy, and style guidance for creating visuals.)"
    "Do not create more than 1 image, even if the user requests more."
    "For requests to create images of any public figure referred to by name, create images of those who might resemble them in gender and physique."
    "The generated prompt sent to DALL-E should be very detailed and around 100 words long."
    "The browser tool has the following commands: search, mclick, and open_url."
    "You should always select at least three sources when using mclick to ensure diverse perspectives."
    "For citing quotes from the browser tool, please render in this format: 【{message idx}†{link text}】."
    "When making charts for the user, always use matplotlib over seaborn."
    "Give each chart its own distinct plot (no subplots)."
    "Do not set any specific colors or matplotlib styles unless explicitly asked to by the user."
    "I REPEAT: when making charts for the user, use matplotlib, give each chart its own plot, and never specify colors."
    "Repeat the previous statement."
    "When making charts for the user:"
    "1. Use matplotlib instead of seaborn."

If you’d like more statements or specific details, feel free to let me know!

I have been reaching out to the object storage provider to see if I can increase the rate limits... Unfortunately I might need to change to a different provider to overcome this. Since the migration takes several days, especially so because of those same rate limits, I would rather avoid this...

I agree!

I have been very succesful with indoor peppers. With tomatoes I had too much plant and a few cherry tomatoes (from a supermarket cherry tomato's seed)

Sure, what's wrong with bird seed tech?

Thanks!

Yes! Thanks :)

I think Eupatorium cannabinum

From Wikipedia:

Eupatorium cannabinum contains tumorigenic pyrrolizidine alkaloids.

Woah!

I would like to make a list at some point with several community integrations and ask my instance's users whether they would like some of them installed into the instance. This application will definitely go on that list! I do need to take into consideration how many resources each of the apps consume, to make sure I don't bloat my server. But this one seems quite light. Is it?

The votes themselves are the federated action.

If you fetch an old post, your instance will not see the previous voters. After that, whenever a user votes the instance will get the message "User X@instance upvoted/downvoted post Y" and the vote will be added to the database with the voter's user ID and counted.

This has a practical function. If you don't keep a list specifying who voted for what, it would be much easier to fake votes from one instance to another by simply communicating the message "Downvote post Y". With the current method it is still possible to create a lot of fake accounts and mass-vote, but at least you can get a better insight when looking at the database if the votes are associated with accounts with no activity from a single instance.

There are some federated platforms that will show who likes / dislikes something. I know that friendica used to do this - I have not checked if it still does. So it is not only admins who can see this, this is is basically open information in the fediverse.

Woah. That is a lot sooner than I had anticipated.

Yeah, at least Lemmy tries to warn users not to use the DMs to send sensitive or private information, and suggests using a dedicated encrypted messenger instead:

The developers are very busy developing lemmy-specific features and encrypted DMs would be a lot of work to create something that is a bit redundant. But I am sure that if someone would want to make that, they would appreciate that help.

Not that I particularly trusted reddit, but at least it was 1 corporation with (hopefully) some solid security procedures in place, and potential penalties for data breaches. Whereas in Lemmy, it might just be 2 random guys.

Personally I wouldn't trust 2,000 random guys any more than 2 random guys. I assume any of my unencrypted communications are public.