voiper1
Is there a game like this??
The practicalities of "how it works" always seemed important to me.
I've worked with docs that get _updated_, and progressive disclosure: make references to more obscure features in their own page, so they don't majorly bloat the context.
"On it's own" generally means "not steered" or otherwise given professional guidance or input.
I would say "developed the necessary software for a simulator" to be even more impressive - "here solve this problem" and "OK, but first I have to built the entire lab!"
You get a week of research and debugging and testing compressed into a few pages. Even if it's explained well, it's just so much information. And since it's AI, I'm constantly second guessing "is that really true?" and it's exhausting.
But if they went down in cpu usage and memory usage, removed a memory leak, and are MORE compliant with nodejs... it sounds like a MASSIVE success?
Anything else they don't save it. Even if they tell you the model provider saves your data for training.
Don't drive a new car, using new a new type of engine, with a new type of steering wheel, with a new type of entertainment system, .... all at once.
WHEN something goes wrong it will be intense trying to figure it out.
When we have GPT-7 it will still do AI-speak?!
Yes, but, the _shape_ of something does offer affordances of what it makes easier or harder to do. So "obsidian" vs "saving files on my computer" does seem to be a legitimate question.
Why should doctors NEED to save people from themselves?
The default should be what the people in the industry have learned, with full permission to say "For myself, I have written a legally binding document that this is my personal wishes. I suggest you make that decision for your loved one, too."
Patients have the ability to ask for more, but there shouldn't be a constant need to save people from inadvertently choosing risky/painful low payoff medical care!
I was firmly in the camp that blockchain was not a viable solution to any problem, and that NFTs sound stupid. I think AI is much different than that list. So, there goes your argument?
Even seasoned coders using plan mode are funneled towards "get the code out" when experience shows that the final code is a tiny part of the overall picture.
The entire experience should be reorganized that the code is almost the afterthought, and the requirements, specs, edge cases, tests, etc are the primary part.
Models that are trained only on public domain material. For value add usage, not simply marketing or gamification gimmicks...
(And obligatory https://xkcd.com/1053/)
I guess today's my day: https://xkcd.com/1053/
Will give it a try, thanks!
Possibly I could do much more prompt fine-tuning to nudge openai/anthropic in the direction I want, but with the same prompts Gemini often gives me answers/structure/tone I like much better.
Example: I had claude 3.7 generating embedding images and captions along with responses. Same prompt into Gemini it gave much more varied and flavorful pictures.