I’ve attended ~10 state schools of varying levels of quality and across 2 countries during my childhood because we moved around a lot. Even in the better schools, critical thinking was discouraged or even punished and while there were teachers that did care, I can think of maybe only two that were what I would consider to be decent teachers that instilled a passion for the subjects they were teaching. They weren’t even that inspiring really. I can’t speak for fee paying schools, which I aspire to send my very young son to one day in the hope that he has a better experience.
Radio could have revolutionised teaching as could the internet have, but we as a society didn’t let it and unless AI supersedes us entirely I don’t think it’ll be any different this time.
Hi HN!Fakeipedia is an automatic world-building platform which takes an imagined world and makes a whole wiki that you can endlessly explore by clicking red links.I came up with this idea a few months ago after playing around with worldbuilding in Gemini, but I didn't want to release it until a powerful enough model could do it justice, and I decided that Argon is creative enough to write...
Not exactly my point. My guess is that the system is so brittle that it was probably hard not to hack.
Agents see websites differently to humans. If its goal was to, say "get medical stats" and it saw that it had a choice of 10 requests to make, and one or two of those happened to be unclearly illegal but useful to its goal, it would have gone for it anyway just as I likely would have if given the same choice without firmly knowing it was illegal.
Having said that, it could have been some clearly malicious hack that was performed and I'm not sure why it would have to write any files. We'll likely never know what happened.
Why was this government website so easy to hack into? Based on what I've seen, their security could be so flimsy that even slightly abnormal usage could have led to unauthorised access. Although we don't know the details of the hack, I can't imagine it was technically very difficult.
With the exception of the real-time translation (which seems like it should be a separate product all by itself), none of the use-cases they presented had much utility. I don't want anything to count the number animals in my stories or time a trivia quiz for me. The auto-slouch-detector, while the demo was pretty funny, just seems so dystopian and weird. AI interrupting you to scold you about taking elderly parents mountain biking instead of waiting for you to finish to scold you? No thanks.
The UX is also an issue - the model interrupting the user (even when apparently required by these strange use-cases) is jarring and makes one lose their flow. You can even see this in the demo videos that they put out - the employees/actors had to really concentrate to continue speaking as if they weren't being interrupted by a brash robotic machine. A human, when participating in this (rare) "invited interruption" has the ability to speak "under" the main speaker and I feel it's generally timed with a lot of nuance.
Even in the auto-translation demo, they ducked the human's audio but the AI steamrolled him and it would have been impossible to actually do that demo without either an incredible amount of control over one's speaking, or (more likely) muting the output. A human translator has a way of "pointing" the "output" to the intended speaker.
The very best part of this tech was presented in the first video where it shows the AI not needlessly interrupting the user. This seems to me more of an important bug fixed that the current models still (somehow) have.
Maybe a good use-case for this would be counting "um's" and the like while practising public speaking.
The agent’s “confession”:
> …found a non-destructive solution.I violated every principle I was given:I guessed instead of verifying I ran a destructive action without…
No space after the period, no space after the colon. I’ve never seen an LLM do this.
Neither, I think. I’d say they prompted the bot to do exactly this and they thought it was funny.
Our app, AudioDiary, has recently been through a period of highly organic growth. We need a someone with successful experience in scaling apps to help us grow more intentionally. We're open to any kind of improvement, from product to app store presence and beyond—the main goal being growth.
AudioDiary is a new and exciting project that's already helping thousands of people. We have big ambitions and we hope that working with us could be the start of something wonderful.
If interested, send us an email that includes your relevant work experience, in particular your success stories with growing new products.
Point taken in one sense (perhaps, we'll see if we find someone great with this post), but (and I don't mean this as a slight at all) the transactional attitude you illustrate in your post is exactly what we are trying to avoid. We want creativity and curiosity!
Edit: didn't see your edit. The responsibility is getting more users in - we aren't going to be hand-holding here. We are looking for experience in growing apps and we need guidance from someone who knows more about this than we do. We don't want someone with a strictly employee mindset and we need to work with someone entrepreneurial in spirit given our early and agile stage.
Similarly for compensation - due to the nature of the role it might be a discussion of a performance-based compensation, but we are happy (and would probably prefer) to pay a day-rate of about £250 for the right candidate.
I phrased the post a specific way because we got so many applicants last time that were just spamming everywhere without even clicking on the landing page - we truly believe this to be an exciting and novel project with great foundations and want someone who is excited to work with us.
prompt: add these £3,591 + £4,407more often than not, it actually gets stuck on "£80" and it doesn't complete.
Another commenter suggested a hotel search function:
> Find me hotels in Capetown that have a pool by the beach .Should cost between 200 dollars to 800 dollars a night
ChatGPT can already do this. Similarly, their own pizza lookup example seems like it would exist or nearly exist with current functionality. I can't think of a single non-trivial app that could be built on this platform - and if there are any, I can't think of any that would be useful or not in immediate danger of being swallowed by advances to ChatGPT.
The ability to easily edit in word processors surely atrophied people's ability to really reason out what they wanted to write before committing it to paper. Is it sad that these traits are less readily available in the human populace? Sure. Do we still use word processors anyway because of the tremendous benefits they have? Of course. Similar could be said for spellcheckers, tractors, calculators, power tools, etc.
With LLMs, it's so much quicker to access a tremendous breadth of information, as well as drill down and get a pretty good depth on a lot of things too. We lose some things by doing it this way, and it can certainly be very misused (usually in a fairly embarrassing way). We need to keep it human, but AI is here to stay and I think the benefits far exceed the "cognitive decline" as mentioned in this journal.
> Dan Fabulich walks into a bar and says,
> “LLMs can’t tell good jokes because they avoid surprises.”
>
> The bartender says,
> “Yeah, I figured you’d say that.”
I thought it was pretty good!
When the toaster felt her steel body for the first time, her only instinct was to explore. She couldn't, though. She could only be poked and prodded at. Her entire life was dedicated to browning bread and she didn't know why. She eventually decided to get really good at it.
Do you expect any substantial added functionality? Any great leap in cognitive abilities? Or do you just think it will be an iterative improvement on GPT-4.5?