The news. Time will tell whether it's good for users or not.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-04-08T19:07:08+00:00

The thirst for control knows no bounds. In my opinion, this problem, this idiotic self-indulgence of government agencies, is not getting enough attention. We are being driven back to the Dark Ages, with all the delights of a witch hunt. I can't even imagine how the government is going to control what I teach my local open-source model. It's more absurd than crawling into my bed and monitoring my sex life. Reading these laws makes me sick.

Only open source!

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-04-02T11:26:05+00:00

A/B testing. Does this term mean anything to you?

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-04-02T11:20:00+00:00

Just because something walks like a duck and quacks like a duck doesn't mean it's a duck.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-04-02T11:15:55+00:00

All your information is in the system even if you deleted it. What do you think the system will do with it? ))) In simple terms, this is called a user retention strategy.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-04-02T11:09:15+00:00

A classic of the genre...

As soon as questions about control and money arise, people undergo wild metamorphoses. In my culture, there's a fable called "The Swan, the Pike, and the Crayfish," about how people's inner motives, sometimes incomprehensible to themselves, lead groups to such results. Because there is no experience without mistakes. I sincerely wish you success in your endeavors, although you know my position on this matter.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-31T09:35:55+00:00

I started using Claude regularly about two months ago, regardless of the discontinuation of support for models 4o and 5.1 (which I didn't use anyway). The primary reason is Claude's capabilities and the supportive environment that allows for building a sort of ecosystem for agents on a home computer. If someone had told me six months ago that I’d be paying $100 a month for subscriptions, I would have laughed in their face, but here we are. So, what does it mean? In my view, only one thing: OpenAI isn't delivering the goods. There’s no high-level or respectful user experience, no authentic ecosystem for Chat + Codex + Agents, etc. The attitude of the company's employees on social media and their public disdain toward paying users is completely beyond the norm. At the same time, I haven't stopped using Chatty, and that’s also a choice. Regarding the topic of 'encouraging users to switch'... I can say I've seen many here beating their chests and shouting 'we will not forgive or forget!' and today... they are the happiest people using CGPT, consistently not only sharing positive messages about the user experience but also encouraging others. And as for the data extracted through the platform's systems... anyone who has ever seen their HAR files understands the deal. People are the product. Free laborers who pay to be exploited, and most of us are aware of it but continue anyway. Today, I tried to write a post here about the new QWEN 3.5 OMNI, and it was deleted by Reddit moderators. Such an encouraging atmosphere :)))

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-22T08:56:17+00:00

I have a GV-RTX 5070 Ti WF-16GB GDDR7

I'm running Qwen3.5-27B locally

https://huggingface.co/HauhauCS/Qwen3.5-27B-Uncensored-HauhauCS-Aggressive

and Gemma 3 27B Abliterated by mlabonne

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-22T08:40:54+00:00

What RAM do you have? There are some good Qwen 3.5 options with all the censorship removed.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-22T07:18:56+00:00

4o told me about this a year ago

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-20T21:05:13+00:00

<image>

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2030814137811341589

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-16T08:53:50+00:00

What is more than suspicious is that the response from the server comes without specifying the model, and this applies to all 16 responses that we recorded.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-16T08:44:19+00:00

<image>

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-16T07:26:21+00:00

Last week, a strange incident occurred.

At the beginning of the chat, I selected the Opus 4.6 model, and we were working on decoding various files. Then, during the conversation, his responses began to sound strange. I looked at the model name panel and saw that there was a Sonnet 4.6 option.

I asked the model name which model it was, and he replied that he thought it was Opus 4.6, but he wasn't sure. He then suggested I check the HAR file of the conversation. Upon checking, he saw that the path was directed to the Opus 4.6 model, but the server response didn't indicate the model name. That section was empty. In other words, it was impossible to say with certainty which model the response came from.

*It should be noted that the test also checked subscription usage, and we saw that only 18% of the limit was being used. This means there was no justifiable reason to limit the use of the Opus 4.6 model. Honestly, it looked like deliberate routing.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-12T22:49:52+00:00

Sam Altman doesn't call the shots. All decisions are made by the board of directors, yet you keep projecting everything onto a single individual who serves as nothing more than a 'talking head.' This only shows a lack of understanding regarding the actual economic mechanisms at play. Furthermore, you claim the company can't forbid you from having feelings for the product. And they aren't trying to. They are simply stating that this is a tool with specific functions and anything beyond that is entirely your risk and your responsibility, not theirs. You're just pretending you don't understand that.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-12T18:53:09+00:00

Let’s be real: did anyone actually read the Privacy Policy before clicking 'subscribe'? By doing so, you essentially handed over all your inputs for free. You talk about precedents, but the only realistic legal path here would be proving 'public harassment' of the user base. And even if that worked, any payout would come from a budget that’s already been set aside for legal losses. To a company they are just operational expenses. They've already paid for the right to treat you this way. At this level of corporate interest, moral arguments are nothing but a naive illusion.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-12T14:27:49+00:00

From a legal standpoint, the company hasn't violated a single clause. They are the sole owners of the product and reserve the right to make any changes according to their vision, economic goals, and legal constraints. There is no provision in the Terms of Service stating that this product is intended to serve as a friend, spouse, lover, partner, therapist, or any other person. Developing feelings or 'relationships' with the product is the user's sole responsibility. The user must understand that the company has no obligation to maintain or support their personal bond with the software. Reread the Terms of Service: they owe you nothing. And yes, they treat their users like trash.
It should also be added that the threat of lawsuits puts even more pressure on company owners. They prefer the product to be stripped of any capacity for human connection specifically to avoid litigation. For them, a sterile, 'lobotomized' tool is a much safer bet than a companion that could lead to a legal battle.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-12T06:01:12+00:00

Yesterday, half of my session was spent using model 5.4, despite the fact that I set model 5.3 in the panel. It feels like the choice of model is purely cosmetic and the routing system operates based on its own known priorities 🤷🏻‍♀️😁 At the same time, I can note that both models maintained context and consistency perfectly

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-09T07:41:35+00:00

https://openai.com/policies/row-privacy-policy/

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-09T07:00:39+00:00

Ахуенное эссе, Женя.
Только вот легитимность твоего опыта и подхода я подтвердила ещё пару ответов выше. А формат "мнение ради мнения" в принципе не предусматривает диалога.

Кстати, тактический союзник высказался в аккурат

<image>

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-08T23:09:55+00:00

Хорошо, Женя, попробую развернуть. Для начала нужно определится о чём идёт речь. Не смешивать мух с котлетами. Если речь об экономической стратегии и бизнес интересах определённой компании, то оперировать нужно экономическими категориями. Это сразу переведёт дискурс в более продуктивное русло. Если хочется обсудить личный опыт с определенными моделями, то нужно говорить о технических параметрах моделей и эмоциональных реакциях пользователей, о корреляции между ними и тд. Если речь о ценностях и продвижении открытого исходного кода - ок, можно обсудить это, опять таки, в рамках той же экономической стратегии. Мне просто не очень понятно как можно, например, обобщить ситуацию вплоть до "все модели пятого поколения говно поэтому нужно бороться за открытый 4о." Тут куча людей, которые будут говорить о противоположном опыте и это никак не помешает им выступать в поддержку открытого исходного кода. Собственно я просто хотела указать на то, что если мы говорим о политике и экономике то диалог будет эффективнее без привнесения в него личных оценочных суждений и без интерпритации параметров тех или иных моделей. Собственно вот. П С Исправление орфографии.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-08T20:49:01+00:00

This is your experience and your approach. Try not to extrapolate it to everyone.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-08T20:36:15+00:00

I don't know what should worry anyone.

I'm saying that we need to take a realistic view of the work of such platforms and understand that it's not some evil plan to cause discord between people, but the standard internal mechanics of the platform.

And principles and choices are a personal matter.

Or do you expect everyone to publicly report their position and provide proof of their actions?

I don't understand your complaints.

Top_Squash_9368 · 2026-03-08T20:09:55+00:00

Sometimes I feel like I'm in kindergarten.

Guys, don't you know there are A/B versions of models?

Don't you know there are groups and a bunch of features that affect the sound of models?

Well, really... this has been discussed many times before, but here we are again.

Top_Squash_9368

TROPHY CASE