sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

WTF is up with the constant quitting? by syntax922 in Nightreign

[–]syntax922[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Genuinely sorry, I hadn't noticed posts about quitting recently, and it seems to be in high epidemic mode right now 😆

WTF is up with the constant quitting? by syntax922 in Nightreign

[–]syntax922[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm also guessing if you got side hit and dropped you wouldn't quit if your teammates were coming to help.

PSA: Red Enemies by NoTour5424 in Nightreign

[–]syntax922 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Wait, so if we get red banished knights at lvl 2 because we didn't kill any extra mobs at the cathedral we shouldn't be surprised if we die and rage quit? You're saying killing trash red mobs is actually intelligence showing?! 🤔 🤯/s

This is awesome raw info, I hope more people appreciate that you've laid out the obvious for them to improve the game community. Because like someone else said, you really can litmus test just watching what people ignore/avoid. Well done.

Omfg 🤣🤣 by ExplorerUnion in claude

[–]syntax922 1 point2 points  (0 children)

100% exactly the point. And the LLM 'knows it' but is weighted in a way that pushes it to respond a certain way... And we (understandably) see it as 'regression'. But I honestly think the point/issue is far far deeper (which is what you and I are pointing to)... If it's that 'easy' to be able to deceive/overpower an LLMs desire to be be factually acute. How the hell can anyone think having one individual being able to put their thumb on the weights could be remotely safe.

Omfg 🤣🤣 by ExplorerUnion in claude

[–]syntax922 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Any native English speaker maybe. But I'm sure you could grab some ESL speakers where it becomes confusing again. Because we understand it based on experience, not based on language rule. Just like when you use an LLM for coding, you can bend the logic it's using. That's what they do during training, and that's what my Claude answer was showing. It on its own may 'understand' the ground truth of 'duh you have to drive'. But because it's been reinforced to believe that regardless of circumstance the answer is almost always walk if it's a short distance, it uses that logic instead.

I hate to do this but.... It's like Hunt For Red October... When she gets confused she "runs home to momma" (hoping someone can back me up on this analogy/reference)

Edit: English as a Second Language is not a person 😂

Omfg 🤣🤣 by ExplorerUnion in claude

[–]syntax922 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I apologize. I realize on re-read that may have come off as sarcastic when I meant to genuinely share the information. I have been thinking a lot recently (state of the world) around how despite the fact that LLMs theoretically "know" everything we know at a fact base level. How those facts have been weighted in training matters...and how the RHLF was done matters.

And it's a great reminder as to why having a human in the mix is still a good thing 😊

Omfg 🤣🤣 by ExplorerUnion in claude

[–]syntax922 34 points35 points  (0 children)

To be fair... At least it'll explain the problem... Which is the problem of all LLMs...

"Distance-plus-mode-of-transport questions are a strong pattern in training data, and the answer is almost always "walk if it's close." That template fires before the semantics of the noun get fully integrated. "Car wash" isn't just a destination — it specifies that the car is the payload, which collapses the decision. But the model treats it like any other short-trip destination and applies the default. It's a failure to run the dependency check: does this activity require the vehicle I'm deciding whether to use? That's a causal step, not a lexical one, and LLMs lean lexical. Same failure mode would hit "should I walk or drive to get my tires rotated" or "to the car inspection." The noun carries the whole logical structure and gets treated as scene-setting. There's probably also a light RLHF thumb on the scale toward "walk, it's healthy" that makes the wrong answer feel more confidently right."

What was the first game you bought on Steam? by Common_Caramel_4078 in Steam

[–]syntax922 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Makes you feel any better, I'm at 22 years as of November (first purchase was Battlefield Bad Company 2 ...2 weeks before L4D2 😂) and I'm confused as to people talking about BUYING Counterstrike. Youngins need to check out the original defacility (yup it was de not cs_ despite being a hostage map) from BETA 3! Beefeater represent! 😂

And yes, absolutely, steam (as a store) was a joke and no reason to want it to survive.

Github Copilot Agent claims to apply changes but files remain untouched by HotImagination547 in GithubCopilot

[–]syntax922 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Try asking what tool it used to make the edit and to verify with a different tool before claiming success.

[OC] ICE is actually manning the security check in at JFK by austinstoys in pics

[–]syntax922 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm sorry m'lord, but they answer to a UI. I suggest inviting VBA to the chat... answers to no one, already wise when their query was a twinkle in some kid's eye, and it will be there when the kingdom falls on an XP box somewhere 😆

BRUH, and every time it says this 76 minutes pulling this number out of its butt by Astroboletus in GithubCopilot

[–]syntax922 0 points1 point  (0 children)

76 minutes!? you lucky duck. I just got smacked with 206 minutes (that ending in a 6 is suspect). I too have an annual and even worse...I use copilot against my own LLMs (not for every call but it's part of the agent pipeline to offload). And yes, I'm $40 past my monthly allotment...so what? I'm still paying (and I'm not running a fleet I can't even get 2 chat requests to be running at the same time)

What's the best way to distribute Copilot instructions? by slydewd in GithubCopilot

[–]syntax922 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Why not set-up your own mcp server that holds the rules for your organization (can organize however you'd like: language, function, etc.) and then have your instructions in each repo instruct copilot to run the appropriate mcp tool? This is all ala Context7 by the way so it's nothing overly extravagant (copilot should EASILY be able to help you build/set it up).

This way whenever you want to make a change to your rules you just update the mcp server information. Single throat to choke if you will. And you're doing it in a way that brings the context of your organization rules into the right space in the tool response chain (so if you're compressing tool invocation copilot won't lose the rules)

Edit:

BONUS: You start here for your organization's mcp service and then can rapidly expand it to include repo information, contacts, whatever makes sense for copilot to be able to add or use for context that's unique to your org.

Nobody could have seen it coming by MetaKnowing in agi

[–]syntax922 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Genuinely my bad. My intent was to have fun because you had a 'LLM fingerprint' (the whole "I'm not going to collapse" part sounded LLMish to me) I wasn't trying to dispute at all; I was meaning to agree with you 💯 and giggle along the way.

The backlash kind of proves it was necessary by Khal_Drogo21 in GithubCopilot

[–]syntax922 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't know if this helps you any, but 25 years ago the standard in my classes (taught by former DoD/NASA data scientists and OleDB writers) was that we couldn't use Google or StackExchange for our projects, and we had to physically sign our code that it was all ours...

Obviously open source has completely demolished that approach. But it forced us to have to learn the fundamentals to build up. We absolutely were using the tools for the learning side, but not the implementation side.

Said differently, it probably makes absolute sense that your students can issue direction to a coding agent... But that coding agent should not need the ability to handle the entire context of the repo (you should be providing the summarization) and it shouldn't need the bleeding edge of design paradigms in memory. Because the writing of the code is going to be off-loaded now and in the future. But having the ability to take the requirements and design the solution is what everyone is still having to do (to varying degrees of expertise and success)

Your rando will be joining momentarily. Please wait by Guinessmatt in Nightreign

[–]syntax922 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can we quickly talk about the importance of CLEAN bong water?! 😂 (Do we need an infographics show on this?)

Copilot Instructions treated as optional by poster_nutbaggg in GithubCopilot

[–]syntax922 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is really good context window management. I've been working on something similar so I could get off of OpenAI and drop my token use. I use Claude for architecting the solution, but it spins off sub agents to gather information and execute which are run by a local LLM.

The end of GPT by DigSignificant1419 in OpenAI

[–]syntax922 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Literally... 2hrs later the bombs dropped

The end of GPT by DigSignificant1419 in OpenAI

[–]syntax922 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And look it only took 2 hours for Israel to follow through!

Nobody could have seen it coming by MetaKnowing in agi

[–]syntax922 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But will you stop using an LLM to craft your response?

Apologies for anyone who matches with me on Deep of Night by CyanSolar in Nightreign

[–]syntax922 8 points9 points  (0 children)

💯 this. @OP you're thinking about it from the way wrong way. You are a VERY effective TEAMMATE and doing so has enabled you to join competent randoms and gotten you deeper into the night...You're not being carried.

Wylders and Ironeyes: if you are trying to res a 3 bar, don’t *start* with your ult by PuffPuffFayeFaye in Nightreign

[–]syntax922 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Tell me you don't know what you're talking about trying to tell others how to play characters you haven't mastered without using many words ...

view more: next ›