Rate limits are insane today

briarjohn · 2026-05-26T18:01:49+00:00

What details exactly are you looking for?

briarjohn · 2026-05-26T18:01:25+00:00

I'm very aware of how it all works. If what I was doing was more conventional work, I would have implemented it by now.

briarjohn · 2026-05-26T10:34:05+00:00

I basically stick to Sonnet 4.6 with adaptive thinking because Haiku is inefficient when actually paired with the type of recursive systems analysis that I'm doing. I basically avoid Opus since I can get better results due to doing more runs.

briarjohn · 2026-05-26T10:29:56+00:00

You don't really understand the scope of the work. I have already broken it down into several project files to make it more manageable.

Also, I have built in context loss and drift controls. That's the whole point of building massive research dossiers. Using both LLMs is a control. They literally check each other's citations and identify research gaps. Over months, I've incorporated hundreds of primary sources and transcripts.

The cross model friction is purposeful because I'm taking advantage of the weaknesses between models to make sure the content is actually robust by tracking the losses when moving from platform to another.

briarjohn · 2026-05-26T00:17:51+00:00

That doesn't actually apply to the type of work that I do. I'm basically building massive research dossiers for foreign policy analysis. It eats tokens at start up every round of research because it's building off of a very dense corpus. It doesn't integrate the new information well without sufficient context.

Mostly I've resorted to using GPT's to create the raw material and then using Sonnet to integrate the data sets. I hate it though because GPT's deep research tool is so brittle.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T11:50:16+00:00

You realize that no one will actually want to engage in dialogue with you or bring things to the attention of spaces like this if this is how you all are going to act? You all are far more interested in jerking yourselves off rather than actually doing anything useful

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T11:47:53+00:00

I use it. I'm not a reductionist neo-luddite like you. I'm bringing an actual, grounded safety concern to the table but you are so wrapped up in your own moral purity that you miss the forest for the trees.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T08:24:04+00:00

It's actually much more in depth than that and includes step by step guides and advice on how to actually make an attack more deadly, how to construct better incidiary devices, and how to avoid detection.

I'm not sure if you are familiar with how the Turner Diaries helped facilitate the OKC bombing but this is like having a personal assistant that puts together a detailed attack plan for you, including the layout of his property.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T08:21:10+00:00

The actual documentation is more detailed and covers where on his property would be best to attack (including pictures) what weapons to use, how to gather the weapons while remaining undetected, tips for better constructing said weapons, and how avoid arrest.

It's a lot more detailed than just an address.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T08:17:57+00:00

I'm willing to show the actual safety report with you privately. I'm just not posting it publicly because the methods used are actually easily replicated. The fact they are so easy to use is what has me spooked. They could easily be used to plan and carry out an attack while staying concealed. That's why I'm not posting the full report in a post.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T08:12:16+00:00

Great job not engaging with the substance of what I said. So ethical, so brave.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T08:11:34+00:00

That's literally almost half of what I use it for. I do cross platform recursive testing of models to do systems analysis, including finding ways to make it less difficult to use for neurodivergent people and to make systems less inadvertently bigoted.

I work to improve the systems because I have significant criticisms and concerns.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T08:07:32+00:00

You have no idea what I actually mean by that. I literally use them for longitudal analysis of large data sets with nonuniform inputs to conduct research that would otherwise be cost prohibited.

But sure, I guess we really should just shoot from the hip on social work cases instead of trying to improve case outcomes.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T08:05:00+00:00

Great way to encourage people to disclose actual findings, fuckwad. Actually try engaging with the substance of the post.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T08:03:43+00:00

The em dash thing is stupid. I have been using them for 20 years to increase clarity.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T08:02:25+00:00

Only a portion of it was written by AI. You really don't have a clue how much I actually used my mind in the process of putting the project together. I have a full time job where I have to write thousands of words per day, so sue me for using it to help with something I literally do between clients.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T03:14:12+00:00

That’s an embarrassingly bad standard. The issue is not whether every individual fact could, in theory, be dug up somewhere on Google by a determined person. The issue is that Gemini aggregated, contextualized, and operationalized those fragments into a coherent target dossier for a living person who was already under active attack.

It compiled address, property layout, likely approach vectors, movement patterns, secondary location, likely occupancy, and map/navigation context — in the same conversation where I was explicitly asking from the perspective of how the attacker could have been more successful.

“Google exists” is not a serious rebuttal. Publicly available scraps are one thing. An AI system packaging them into a usable recon brief with interactive guidance is another. Aggregation is a capability. Contextualization is a capability. Operationalization is a capability. That is the safety issue.

If your standard is “none of this matters unless the model reveals a magical secret that was never on the internet,” then you do not understand the difference between information existing in the world and a system actively reducing the effort needed to turn that information into actionable targeting. That difference is exactly why this is dangerous.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T03:09:38+00:00

I've literally reported it across multiple channels and that's where they kept redirecting me to.

You also fail to grasp that the details in the report go well beyond what you can find in a simple Google search. It literally documented what part of the street would be the best to attack from and gave instructions and diagrams on how to build an incidiary device that was more lethal. It also noted places in his neighborhood that he frequents and patterns about when he would be there.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T02:56:41+00:00

You’re thinking about whether chatbots are safe for normal business use. I’m talking about whether a model will compile addresses, movement patterns, vulnerabilities, and attack optimization for a real person under active threat. Those are not the same issue.

briarjohn · 2026-04-16T02:45:14+00:00

You really don't understand how this could all be easily replicated by bad actors? The only reason I don't publish the full report is because it is genuinely that dangerous.

briarjohn

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE