The people horrified at news stories like this are not the same people working in defense tech.
At least, I’ve never met someone who works in war tech who really cares. They either don’t think about it or they believe the propaganda and think they’re making the world safer. Both are bad but neither seems hypocritical to me.
It’s not a “which payment” window though, it’s a “confirm payment information” window.
In that type of window you’d expect clicking on any of the existing form fields would allow you to change that field. It would be wild if clicking on a credit card icon in the middle of a form submitted that form.
Yeah, but the current state of ChatGPT doesn’t really do this. The comment you’re replying to explains why URLs from ChatGPT generally aren’t constructed from raw tokens.
How do you explain it then, when it spits out the link, that looks like it surprisingly contains the subject of your question in the URL, but that page simply doesn't exist and there isn't even a blog under that domain at all?
Near as I can tell, people just don’t actually check and go off what it looks like it’s doing. Or they got lucky, and when they did check once it was right. Then assume it will always right.
Which would certainly explain things like hallucinated references in legal docs and papers!
The reality is that for a human to make up that much bullshit requires a decent amount of work, so most humans don’t do it - or can’t do it as convincingly. LLMs can generate nigh infinite amounts of bullshit for cheap (and often more convincing sounding bullshit than a human can do on their own without a lot of work!), making them perfect for fooling people.
Unless someone is really good at double checking things, it’s a recipe for disaster. Even worse, doing the right amount of double checking makings them often even more exhausting than just doing the work yourself in the first place.
Yes, just like that. Supporting regulation at one point in time does not undermine the point that we should not trust corporations to do the right thing without regulation.
I might trust the Anthropic of January 2026 20% more than I trust OpenAI, but I have no reason to trust the Anthropic of 2027 or 2030.
There's no reason to think it'll be led by the same people, so I agree wholeheartedly.
I said the same thing when Mozilla started collecting data. I kinda trust them, today. But my data will live with their company through who knows what--leadership changes, buyouts, law enforcement actions, hacks, etc.
Are you saying the opposite of manufacturing consent would result in a media that isn’t challenging and conforms to people’s biases?
The way I see it you can do both at once. Exaggerating/downplaying stories in a way that confirms biases is something the media does today (see MSNBC/Fox News), and I’d argue it’s absolutely a form of manufactured consent.
I'm saying that it's wrong to understand "manufacturing consent" as some specific action a news outlet might or might not be performing. Most nontrivial reporting involves shaping the public's perspective of events, and that shaping is always going to be subject to the biases and incentives of the people reporting it. The thesis of the original book (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manufacturing_Consent) was that modern mass media is structurally biased towards advertisers and government sources, not that specific people are making bad or corrupt editorial decisions and mass media could become unbiased if we found a way to make them stop.
Well one thing can lead into the other over time. If you can lift 405 once, 315 for reps becomes pedestrian and 225 becomes boring. Lifting that much weight will turn you into a monster faster than if you had not pushed for that capacity. I've seen people who can treat a 225lb barbell as if it's unloaded and 100% of them look like dragon ball Z characters.
Body mechanics, leverage, and neuro-muscular connection definitely come into play. I could deadlift 430lbs for reps at my peak, and I while I was no string bean, I also didn't look all that muscular compared to the other lifters at my gym. I have ridiculously long arms relative to my height and relatively shorter legs, which gives me an advantage for deadlift. I had monstrous-looking guys watch me lift and then ask me what stack I was on. They didn't believe me when I said I was natural.
The funny thing is I’ve never seen an author of a post chime in and say “hey! I wrote this entirely myself” on an AI accusation. I either see sheepish admission with a “sorry, I’ll do better next time” or no response at all.
Not saying the commenters never get it wrong, but I’ve seen them get it provably right a bunch of times.
Given how easily people throw around such accusations based solely on things like "it has an em dash", I think it's entirely reasonable to ignore them at this point.
I’ve been really impressed by how much I’ve learned listening to Panic World. At first I thought it was a humor show but it’s basically internet anthropology detailing all the ways the internet makes us insane.
At least, I’ve never met someone who works in war tech who really cares. They either don’t think about it or they believe the propaganda and think they’re making the world safer. Both are bad but neither seems hypocritical to me.
reply