Given the the labs are trying to create [super] human-like consciousness, partly through the guidance of huge system prompts, and many philosophers are experts in textual descriptions of consciousness it makes sense
Just went down a chatgpt rabbit hole because I was also curious - seems it’s literally physical repackaging, no modification of the drug itself- as another commenter pointed out it’s not quite the same molecule but they have the same effect? Someone correct me if I’m wrong
this happened to me too. few things about the process made me suspicious. i downloaded the repo and told claude to "find the malware". took about 15 seconds. remote code execution that would have run upon npm install, iirc. many layers of obfuscation. in implementation, a little different to the op's situation but there are similarities. it was a "crypto startup". maybe they think people in crypto world are more forgiving of idiosyncrasies in the recruiting process? i reported the recruiter's profile to linkedin, with extensive details. they said they wouldn't look into it unless i opened a ticket in some other part of their site, lol. however it seems they got onto it, or someone else complained, because i can't find the recruiter "alice kenny" anymore. but the "company" she was recruiting for is still live:
I don’t know why people have to pick one side or the other. AI speeds up development at the cost of oversight. Whether this tradeoff makes sense depends on the real world consequences of getting it wrong and the quality of the foregone oversight, which is very much case by case
Good to know my thoughts are in good company! It seems obvious to me that on some level I believe these llms to be conscious otherwise I wouldn’t feel the urge to type all caps rage in the first place - rather than robotically reverting state to my last prompt. so I don’t want to get used to treating what my brain thinks are conscious beings with anything less than kindness and certainly not habitually calling them the worst words in the language ..
I’d rather lose 4% accuracy and practice kindness! I’ve been actively trying to avoid raging at the bot because I worry about this behaviour leaking into real world interactions
Thanks for commenting :) The whole point is tighter scopes. You control what parameters the agent is allowed to pass when calling endpoints. This allows things like revealing only a few folders in your repo to your agent
I didn’t say it doesn’t exist, rather that it’s already taken into account. I’m also not sure what you are proposing- if mediation is required, and someone has more power than someone else, why would they voluntarily engage with a mediator who will reduce that power? Or if they are forced to use this mediator (eg by the state) then this means they never had the power in the first place
In reality people never have equal power over anything (what would that look like, physically?) so something like nash bargaining is an attempt to get closer to a notion of fair given this inequality
This is so cool. Even small disputes like roommate arrangements can feel very emotionally impactful at the time and it would be wonderful to have a tool for these moments
If you cant find the people, may not be the right market for you :) ideally you are exposed to target market directly, and daily. Or you team up with a cofounder who is. Re: building in saturated market - “prove” is a strong word. It’s another signal. And you can judge for yourself how strong :) i dont think anything can replace direct customer feedback
It is “simple”
Find out what people want
Make it
Sell it to them
Unfortunately, engineer brain loves to skip step 1
Ive recently become friends with a younger person who makes a lot of money off vibe coded mini saas. He is fanatical about step 1. If he can’t find n people begging him to make it he will go validate the next idea. He’s ruthless with this aspect and will drop an idea instantly if people dont care. It really woke me up to the reality of it all. Made me realise how much i delude myself into making things people dont want because i enjoy the making process. I will at best half ass step 1 and the proceed to spend a few months hand crafting some software no one wants. Meanwhile he spends two months validating and one month vibe coding something that people would be embarrassed to post on HN and then sell 100usd/month subscriptions to it. Its crazy
The big difference is that in many cases the people who support this are the same ones that are addicted. You’re telling addicts to stop their moral panic over their own addiction
The difference is that the media is 30 seconds not 2 hours so the feedback loop is shorter and the content pool is far far far deeper because it is user submitted so the content recommendation algorithms become so effective , and the experience so compelling, that it becomes addictive. And as a wise man once said “a difference in scale is a difference in kind”
I watched my 78yo step mother become addicted to reels so older people are definitely not immune. But she was able to go cold turkey as she only communicated with her sister over instagram so it wasn’t a problem to just continue with WhatsApp. Young people real life networks are too enmeshed with instagram to have the same option.
Also, what you’re describing sounds like when you’ve haven’t spent enough time on the shorts for the content recommendation algorithm to learn your preferences. Which I agree, is unwatchable. I saw it recently when my friend put on YouTube shorts on a guest account (on an Airbnb smart tv). it was bad. But spend enough time and that will change. But best you don’t!