Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | empressplay's commentslogin

I think this should be titled 'YOLO one-shotting is not engineering' which is a far more accurate description of the article.

Me too, but I wasn't on AOL or anything long-distance, instead I called local chat systems / BBSes. And because they were local we met up physically as a group at least weekly (almost daily in the summertime).

The summer I was 16 I spent more time away from the computer, hanging out with other teenagers I met on the computer, than I would have otherwise.


Logic Pro allows you to revert to previous saves / auto-saves.

I was lucky enough to be an autistic kid in the 1980s with access to a steady stream of new and novel computers: Apple II, Sinclair, Commodore, Atari, TI, Macintosh... kept me engaged and off the 'short bus'. If I had been born ten years earlier I'm certain my life would have been dramatically different (in a very bad way).


Disinformation isn't about convincing you that something is true; it's about convincing you that nothing is true. If information is considered to be unreliable, you are less likely to act on it decisively.


And the next question is who's to blame?

News organizations each push their own agendas by misrepresenting facts or present rumors or second comments as certainty. Then months later, we finally learn really what happened and realize that a lot of the context of story was missing or completely fabricated.

Then we lament at the death of democracy.


It also seems to have the effect of encouraging you to latch on to whatever "truth" you fancy, providing tools to dismiss any contradictions.

I don't quite get how that keeps people from applying those critical tools to their own beliefs, but we certainly see that a lot. People show up with a Gish gallop attack, without considering the sources that they're using for it.

Regardless, the effect is that in a world that has deliberately deprived people of certainty, they'll defend their own personal domains literally to the death.


Replacing the question of truth vs. falsehood is the question of effective influence. What is the influence of a message on its audience?


All my sites got pwned through this. Attempts to restore from backup just got pwned again in minutes. Ended up using Claude to create static sites from the database and the assets.

I'm never using Wordpress again and I strongly suggest nobody else does either.


You likely restored a compromised backup because the backdoor(s) were already laying there. Or you restored to a theme/plugin with a vulnerability and had it quickly exploited again.

There is some lessons to be learned from your way of trying to fix it. Suggesting not to use a software that is in its core pretty stable and safe, is not one of them.


The #creativecoding and #genart tags on most social media networks will get you a front row seat to the international generative art community -- it's a very creative crowd!


> EFF is more like classical liberal.

I mean, they were, but that no longer appears to be the case.


Appears being the operative word.


I wonder if this is a result of auto-compacting the context? Maybe when it processes it it inadvertently strips out its own [Header:] and then decides to answer its own questions.


I don’t think so, at least not in this particular case. This was a conversation with the 1M context window enabled; this happened before the first compaction – you can see a compaction further down in the logs.

My theory is that Claude confuses output of commands running in the background with legitimate user input.


My own guess is that something like this happened:

Claude in testing would interrupt too much to ask for clarifying questions. So as a heavy handed fix they turn down the sampling probability of <end of turn> token which hands back to the user for clarifications.

So it doesn't hand back to the user, but the internal layers expected an end of turn, so you get this weird sort of self answering behaviour as a result.

As an aside my big reason for believing this, is that this sort of dumb simple patch laid onto of a existing behaviour is often the kind of solution optimizers find. Like if you made a dataset with lots of pairs Where one side has lots of <end of turns> and one side does not. The harder thing to learn tends to be to "ask fewer questions and work more autonomously" while the easy thing to learn "less end of turn tokens" tends to get learned way faster.


The most likely explanation imv


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: