Sigh. OK.
-
@glyph I’ve seen this before, and no LLMs were involved. It’s addiction.
@rmi @glyph Microsoft plans to release an AI that is addictive. Ok, a plan leaked about it. It's probably not the only plan like that.
Microsoft Wants to 'Make People Addicted' to its New AI Assistant, Internal Documents Reveal
Planning documents for "Scout" say the plan is to "make people addicted" to the tool before adding new features.
404 Media (www.404media.co)
This is exactly the mental health status you'd expect e.g. from a smoker. Already diagnosed with COPD, he would still yell at everyone who told him so.
-
@glyph or it could be the patch that caused the regression was written by him in a hurry to fix a security hole. Then he realised he needed better testing and used AI tooling to try and solve the lack of testing and validation. Reading skills can't be that shit around here, maybe use an AI to read his blog post.
-
Sigh. OK. rsync discourse:
This is not a story about “vibe coding” or “slop” or regressions or even open source sustainability or whatever: it’s a story about mental health.
The timeline of Tridge’s response in particular can be broke down like so:
1. AI skeptics say "LLMs create difficult-to-evaluate defects, even if you're careful"
2. Tridge introduces defects even though he was careful
3. he gets yelled at
4. His response is to say "you dinosaurs don't appreciate how *careful* I was!"@glyph I keep reasoning about which logical fallacy is described in this pattern. Dunning-Kruger comes to mind: without knowing the subject being confident to have performed to the best knowledge.
-
Sigh. OK. rsync discourse:
This is not a story about “vibe coding” or “slop” or regressions or even open source sustainability or whatever: it’s a story about mental health.
The timeline of Tridge’s response in particular can be broke down like so:
1. AI skeptics say "LLMs create difficult-to-evaluate defects, even if you're careful"
2. Tridge introduces defects even though he was careful
3. he gets yelled at
4. His response is to say "you dinosaurs don't appreciate how *careful* I was!"@glyph it always surprises me how a non-deterministic model could be taken seriously....
if you train it, due to its non-determinism it looses half its memory between hours of chatting with it. thats not a fault, thats *by design*
i can understand where hes coming from with "careful".
-
Sigh. OK. rsync discourse:
This is not a story about “vibe coding” or “slop” or regressions or even open source sustainability or whatever: it’s a story about mental health.
The timeline of Tridge’s response in particular can be broke down like so:
1. AI skeptics say "LLMs create difficult-to-evaluate defects, even if you're careful"
2. Tridge introduces defects even though he was careful
3. he gets yelled at
4. His response is to say "you dinosaurs don't appreciate how *careful* I was!"@glyph this sounds a whole lot like the rust haters...
-
-
-
-
@Orb2069 “Useful idiot” to me has a component of “meaning well”, of “believing to do something genuinely good”. I just don't see that in 4channers. They are either completely nihilistic and just doing it for the fun or they are actually evil.
-
@glyph or it could be the patch that caused the regression was written by him in a hurry to fix a security hole. Then he realised he needed better testing and used AI tooling to try and solve the lack of testing and validation. Reading skills can't be that shit around here, maybe use an AI to read his blog post.
-
-
@Orb2069 “Useful idiot” to me has a component of “meaning well”, of “believing to do something genuinely good”. I just don't see that in 4channers. They are either completely nihilistic and just doing it for the fun or they are actually evil.
@HeptaSean@social.tchncs.deI i seriously doubt most of them would sign on as terrorism assets if you just walked up to them on a street corner, and yet, here they are, 'for the lulz'.
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
-
@dnkboston @glyph @rmi LLMs are very addictive, by design.
The fawning behavior they default to is not mysteriously influential with people, and some people are more susceptible to that influence than others.
-
@dnkboston @glyph @rmi LLMs are very addictive, by design.
The fawning behavior they default to is not mysteriously influential with people, and some people are more susceptible to that influence than others.
@RandomDamage I find it incredible that we haven't done anything meaningful to stop its rapid spread.
-
Like this is a luminary in the field, mocking his critics for making a prediction he finds risible when that prediction HAS ALREADY COME TRUE. He did the thing, and it went badly, in the way that everyone who is mad at him was saying all along that it would go badly. But he still thinks that he's right! This is not an unrepentant dumb guy being dumb, this is one of the smartest engineers in the field BECOMING dumb right before our eyes. That ought to scare you!
@glyph Many, many years ago, I used to celebrate each new blog post by Steve Yegge. What happened to him scared me. Now we have another victim and I'm more than just scared.
-
Like this is a luminary in the field, mocking his critics for making a prediction he finds risible when that prediction HAS ALREADY COME TRUE. He did the thing, and it went badly, in the way that everyone who is mad at him was saying all along that it would go badly. But he still thinks that he's right! This is not an unrepentant dumb guy being dumb, this is one of the smartest engineers in the field BECOMING dumb right before our eyes. That ought to scare you!
@glyph not enough people are talking about the early part of his post where he wrote (paraphrasing) that "no one knows" how human intelligence works, maybe we're all stochastic parrots. Motherfucker, read a book
-
@be oh fuck this _is_ channer shit isn't it. and it has that "raid" flavor of "unhinged chan trolls interacting with normies". Yeesh. I have registered my displeasure with certain LLM developments by participating in a few heated threads here and there but this is radioactively bad.
in any event thanks for the heads up
-
Sigh. OK. rsync discourse:
This is not a story about “vibe coding” or “slop” or regressions or even open source sustainability or whatever: it’s a story about mental health.
The timeline of Tridge’s response in particular can be broke down like so:
1. AI skeptics say "LLMs create difficult-to-evaluate defects, even if you're careful"
2. Tridge introduces defects even though he was careful
3. he gets yelled at
4. His response is to say "you dinosaurs don't appreciate how *careful* I was!"@glyph unpopular answer I am sure but this is a pile of biased bollocks.
This is a narrative built to prove an idea not a set of facts that leads to a conclusion.
Do better!
-
Like this is a luminary in the field, mocking his critics for making a prediction he finds risible when that prediction HAS ALREADY COME TRUE. He did the thing, and it went badly, in the way that everyone who is mad at him was saying all along that it would go badly. But he still thinks that he's right! This is not an unrepentant dumb guy being dumb, this is one of the smartest engineers in the field BECOMING dumb right before our eyes. That ought to scare you!
@glyph I actually praised his level-headedness cos of his blog but I didn't know he's THAT bad. I mean I don't really see smart people turn bad in real time. It's really rare for me.
-
@glyph I do understand the point being made and personally I'd much rather have software written without AI.
But. It's their project. Stop yelling at people for projects they make in their spare time. If you're mad, don't depend on FOSS, pay for your software.
No amount of good-intent behaviour, even if the outcome may not be great, in a FOSS software project justifies this sort of harassment.
@snaums @glyph That he maintains this software voluntarily and in his spare time isn't relevant here. I'm fully right to criticize his choice to destroy his reputation and his software, whatever it would be, FOSS or proprietary. If he doesn't want to be scrutinized for choices he makes for software he developes, then he shouldn't release this software in the public.
If you disagree, then would you still defend him with this rhetoric if he introduced malware in the code?
