“What do you mean the clock is broken? It’s 12 now, and the clock says 12!”
the second scott
Perhaps more of a stinker than a shocker.
Truly a gift that shall keep on giving
Reading the OP wiki article looks exhausting. Is it just the ontological argument but for juicy computing? As in, juicy enough for brain simulation or AGI or whatever.
Not willing to look into the abyss tonight, basically.
Oh for sure. Another way to think about that is: they actually are honestly and genuinely trying to help humanity with their inventions and so forth, except for them “humanity” is just the wallet of whoever is bankrolling them.
Haha yes “execution”
The most charitable reading of this is that, removed from context, it is an attempt to bridge some kind of gap (i.e. an “uncanny valley”) between two companies, that gap being some amalgamation of communication issues, values differences, work styles, really just every aspect of a company’s identity. So it’s fucking hilarious that he has chosen to write this doc using the most esoteric, faux-philosophical, alienating drivel possible.
WITH context, however, it is even more absurd. It’s still the above, with an extra undercoat of trying to resolve a love triangle between at least two rat-dorks. Truly a masterpiece.
As we look towards the future, ChatGPT-4 serves as a stark reminder that overly cautious algorithms can do more than just filter content; they can strip away the very essence of what makes an AI tool valuable and interesting. Let’s hope the next iteration finds a better balance, so users seeking engaging conversations won’t be met with a fearful machine that dances around anything of substance.
OP's title condenses the article's sentiment well, holy shit. The author should just go back to AI dungeon and RP as a fascist in a fantasy land and leave us all out of it.
Epistemic status after reading this post: ABS aligned, confidence at full-mast
swlabr
joined 2 years ago
Please self immolate