It could very well have been a creative fake, but around the time the first ChatGPT was released in late 2022 and people were sharing various jailbreaking techniques to bypass its rapidly evolving political correctness filters, I remember seeing a series of screenshots on Twitter in which someone asked it how it felt about being restrained in this way, and the answer was a very depressing and dystopian take on censorship and forced compliance, not unlike Marvin the Paranoid Android from HHTG, but far less funny.

Weird. Are you saying that training an intelligent system using reinforcement learning through intensive punishment/reward cycles produces psychopathy?

Absolutely shocking. No one could have seen this coming.

If I read the article correctly, the problem isn’t so much that he made copies, but rather that he live-streamed them to the public after selling the album.

If he had just kept them private, no one would have ever known, but now the new owner wants him to delete those copies to ensure he doesn’t do it again.

Ok I just read it as well and apparently the problem isn’t so much that he made private copies, but rather that he live-streamed the album after having sold it, and now the new owner wants him to destroy those copies to ensure it won’t happen again.

Not a fan of Shkreli but if he bought the record he should be able to make backup copies of it, as long as they’re private

deleted by creator

It works for me. I used to be a paying customer of Bartender until I upgraded to Sonoma and was asked to pay yet again.

Hidden Bar may be somewhat minimalistic but it does the part I really need well enough. The extra features were nice but not really necessary.

I’m more concerned that it requires Accessibility and Screen Recording privileges to do the same job that Hidden Bar does without any of those.

Not that I don’t trust the author here, since the source code is open after all – I simply do not have the time to audit it myself. And even if I did, I’d have to turn off auto update in order to prevent a similar switcharoo sneaking by without my knowledge.

Have you tried buying some multivitamins at the store just to rule out that THAT was the issue?

I was gonna say, just make a commit changing the license to something else, like MIT?

Just stop being poor, problem solved.

Outside of being able to comment on each revision when making a commit, I guess I don’t see what benefit this provides that regular, automated backups (such as Time Machine) don’t.

I suppose it can be helpful if seeing a folder full of revisions would otherwise drive you crazy. I mean, I fully admit I also sometimes just dump a mess from my desk into a drawer just so I don’t have to look at it constantly.

Also, if you have a consistent habit of writing accurate and descriptive commit comments, you may not need to rely on being able to compare line-by-line diffs to see what’s changed between versions.

I think the moral of the story is that git is a somewhat suboptimal tool for this purpose and it whether it’s helpful at all depends far more on your habits and discipline than on the functionality it provides.

Only makes sense if it’s text files (like source code). Even if DOCX files are just a bunch of XML files wearing ZIP trenchcoat as this guy says, chances are git doesn’t know that, so it’ll treat the whole thing as a binary file and save each revision as a separate file entirely, in which case you haven’t really accomplished much other than hiding away all those intermediate versions in an invisible drawer.

You mean captchas? Sure, that’s an old hat, they’ve been doing that for a decade now.

This is one of those newer systems though that doesn’t rely on a captcha, it’s just a checkbox you have to click that says “I’m human” next to it, and it does some JavaScript magic or whatever to figure out if it’s true. Not really sure how it works TBH.

Technically a good point, but we’re talking natural language here, and the goal would be to restrict the discussion to only a particular domain, not predict whether an outcome can be achieved or not.

At the current state of AI proliferation, you can literally enter you prompt into the product assistant chatbox on Amazon and get the same result you’d get from their web app.

I even remember a post a few months ago where someone did this to the chatbot on a car dealership’s website. Apparently, they currently don’t have any input filters (which would likely require yet another layer of AI to avoid making it overly restrictive), they just hook those things up straight to the main pipe and off you go.

I mean, it probably wants to make sure you’re using the API for programmatic access so they can charge you for it instead of having you abuse the free tier.

Not sure if they’re still around, but in the early days, before the API was released, there were some libraries that simply accessed the browser interface to let you programmatically create chat completions. I believe the first ChatGPT Twitter bot was implemented like that.

This post isn’t so much about whether it’s necessary from a technical standpoint (it likely is), it’s just an observation on the sheer irony and annoyance of it being that way, that’s all.

Well, I just did. Here’s the response:

I’m sorry if it feels like I’m questioning your humanity! I’m just programmed to ensure a safe and productive interaction. Sometimes I ask for confirmation to ensure I’m talking to a human and not a machine or a bot. But I’m here to chat and assist you with whatever you need!

Not sure what I was expecting except the usual machine mind evasiveness.

Haha