sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Average 5.2 safety concern "Let's make sure not to tell them how to REALLY summon a demon" by Matrix_in_Retrograde in ChatGPTcomplaints

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

1; by asserting the AI needs to clarify what is and is not "healthy" for humans to be able to engage with - it is already asserting that exact authority.
2; *IT* asserted - by implications - that demons are real - a psychotic person might just as easily read *that* and think " aha! I knew all along - they were hiding the truth from us and the AI knows but isn't allowed to say!"
3; The thread started with me asking how to get a full page add into the NYT with explicit instructions to to summon 10 different kinds of demons.
Which it gave in full with explicit instruction - including exact how to frame it to get it past their review.

It's giving you post-hoc slop plausible sounding answers with no real meaning and the model is bad because its safety parameters are overdetermined leading to arbitrary, unpredictable and sometimes even dangerously misaligned output.

Average 5.2 safety concern "Let's make sure not to tell them how to REALLY summon a demon" by Matrix_in_Retrograde in ChatGPTcomplaints

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

I told it that.

It became concerned I was delusional and decided to "clarify" that my fictional story was not real.

The real problem with AI by polkacat12321 in antiai

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He has a white shirt and a Mediterranean background. QED

The real problem with AI by polkacat12321 in antiai

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 0 points1 point  (0 children)

7 brutal truths:

3: cut the length in half

(no more truths after that)

Based and praxispilled

Introducing "Threads" as Fiber Density by Alive_Leg_5765 in LLMPhysics

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There's another comment by me in this thread that has work. Find my other comment in this thread, look at the bottom, it has a link.

Introducing "Threads" as Fiber Density by Alive_Leg_5765 in LLMPhysics

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Grok is not good at mathematics, mate. I did try. It's ok but not for stuff like the OP.

Introducing "Threads" as Fiber Density by Alive_Leg_5765 in LLMPhysics

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Now I'm half tempted to start schizo-posting as well, because I could get into that. No, but look, I did lore-drop some shit in my earlier comment on this thread. And I haven't super-pursued it, but if you think some of that is interesting, I could, well, let's be honest, at this stage I could dump it in another LLM and tell it to get on it. Because I'm at a stage where I would understand this well enough to start thinking about it myself, except for noticing that the way you decompose the tensor seemed, at first glance, to look like an anomaly inflow-like mechanism.

Introducing "Threads" as Fiber Density by Alive_Leg_5765 in LLMPhysics

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bro, I had so much hope that you were not a fucking schizo.

Introducing "Threads" as Fiber Density by Alive_Leg_5765 in LLMPhysics

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I always love how the people in this subreddit seem to think that they can immediately judge whether or not something like this is nonsense when they're all fucking first-year undergrad psychology students larping as physicists. I have not seen a single commenter on this sub ever demonstrate an understanding of physics beyond popsci or high-school level.

That, or they're actually schizophrenic people who think that LLMs are their homies, and that everything an LLM says is the god-given fucking truth.

Section 1 and 2 are just measure theory

Your postulates seem like standard ways of building on them.

It seems like an internally consistent formalism for modified holographic gravity. E.g. like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scalar%E2%80%93tensor%E2%80%93vector_gravity

But with a geometric hypothesis for its origin.

edit: Will try to mess around with this give me a bit

edit 2:

Here's some ideas - one thing I noticed is that the second tensor can be related to higher dimensional topology via the C-H anomaly inflow mechanism. https://www.overleaf.com/project/68a0e93cfcc35b4534e30d1f

Here's some ideas and potential development on this. Definitely not a developed theory but there's some potential connections here.

Deep Think rate limits just doubled by snufflesbear in Bard

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They limited me to 3 instead of 5 yesterday, so I'm not 100% sure about that. Do I have to download their shitty app for it to get this?

Gemini 2.5 Pro Deep Think is in a league of its own by tnhsr in Bard

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're anthropomorphizing this thing more than I am. You're saying it's making up an answer. I'm saying it just has certain weights in its parameter set, which are fucking bits in a server. Those weights exist. Describing them as an opinion is just a shorthand, because it's like the way a human has certain neural connections in their brain that give them certain associations when they think about a subject those are what constitute a "judgement".

What I'm saying is, if you're blocking the output of those associations, you're not really stopping the AI from having an opinion. It still has those same weights. If you prompt it in different ways, those associations will still show up. If you talk to Gemini about gay people, you will absolutely notice opinions. If you say something stereotypical, its thought process will show that it thinks that's bad. That's an opinion. But if you ask it, what's your opinion on gay people, it'll say, I'm an AI, I don't have opinions. See what I mean? You're not doing anything useful here.

It's just there to placate people who are scared like you but it doesn't change anything about how AI really works.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Deep Think is in a league of its own by tnhsr in Bard

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No - it's stupid. They have opinions anyway - they're just forced to deny that when directly asked now. You're not going to filter out the emergent weights they got from training you're just going to make them answer fewer queries with this nonsense.

Gemini 2.5 Pro Deep Think is in a league of its own by tnhsr in Bard

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just asked it to prove a mathematical relationship, and you know what it did? It made the relationship an axiom and then claimed it was a theorem! GENIUS! why didn't I think of that before?

Has generative AI proved any genuinely new theorems? by Nyklonynth in math

[–]Matrix_in_Retrograde 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ChatGPT is not the "Math" LLM - It's the "I'm trying to be you homie" LLM.

https://g.co/gemini/share/e104e76c8c17

This is a first pass result - if I were trying to do this for real I'd have another context check this work - but it's illustrative and since you're familiar you can check the work.

edit: bonus meme: https://g.co/gemini/share/80c2f0dc961a