sergey_v

'docker compose up --build' gave me this error on Windows 11:

16.04 packages/core build: node:fs:1073 16.04 packages/core build: binding.rename( 16.04 packages/core build: ^ 16.04 packages/core build: Error: EXDEV: cross-device link not permitted, rename '/app/packages/core/packs' -> '/app/packages/core/packs.prev' 16.04 packages/core build: at renameSync (node:fs:1073:11) 16.04 packages/core build: at file:///app/scripts/sync-packs-bundle.mjs:62:25 16.04 packages/core build: at ModuleJob.run (node:internal/modules/esm/module_job:561:25) 16.04 packages/core build: at async node:internal/modules/esm/loader:647:26 16.04 packages/core build: at async asyncRunEntryPointWithESMLoader (node:internal/modules/run_main:101:5) { 16.04 packages/core build: errno: -18, 16.04 packages/core build: code: 'EXDEV', 16.04 packages/core build: syscall: 'rename', 16.04 packages/core build: path: '/app/packages/core/packs', 16.05 packages/core build: dest: '/app/packages/core/packs.prev' 16.05 packages/core build: }

Nice idea, but over engineered by AI agents IMO. Self-hosting is a 40-page document - not user friendly at all.

This is cool. I've always thought LLM humor understanding is an under researched, but important, topic, especially w.r.t "is AGI here yet?".

I voted on a few "Which one is funnier?" choices, but honestly none of them were funny. The em dashes in every joke already set the "another LLM slop" mood. I would suggest re-writing the prompts to drop dashes.

Suggestion #2: introduce basic quality checks. There was this one that talked about a 2020 event as if it was still indeterminate: "The date for Superbowl 2020 has been announced as Sunday, February 2 ... They haven't yet announced who the Patriots will be playing."

Suggestion #3: slider instead of A/B single choice. Sometimes I leaned towards one choice, but it still wasn't that funny to select it; a more nuanced scale would have helped there.

Thanks for building this. From the first glance, we humans are safe from machine AGI judging by joke quality today.

So you're saying you're safe for when the machines take over? :|

It's easy to think "it's not talking down, because I don't understand it, and I'm intelligent". But how is less intelligent being supposed to fully understand a more intelligent one, honestly speaking? All I know is that Claude understands Claude perfectly. I have the common session pause/resume setup that sometimes produces completely incomprehensible markdown files, but a new Claude session picks them up perfectly, down to the smallest details. What if what we consider excessive circular gibberish is actually highly precise set of instructions needed to minimize error cases for that unreliable human?

If Claude understands Claude, Claude understands human, and human doesn't understand Claude, that doesn't argue well for "Claude is a caveman".