Katherine Catmull
austin writer & actor, triumphing over this bullshit game
- It’s genuinely embarrassing that people keep falling for these “AI explains the hidden secrets of its programming” posts. Grok is not sentient, it cannot explain what it’s doing and why.
-
View full threadthat's really interesting, thank you! I wasn't imagining that it was introspection as we know it, just repeating what it was told. Is 'reporting what has been previously said to it' (what I was imagining) the same as retaining 'a memory of what it it was thinking when it generated previous answers'?
- (these are probably pretty ignorant questions but I'd love to know more about how LLMs work)
- But that’s exactly what it does: generate text that is statistically likely to follow from the prompt. It can’t do introspection. It doesn’t know why it said anything or what the words even mean.
- i understand (i think) that it can’t know if it’s been reprogrammed but it seems know when it’s been given a prompt and can refer back to that—why is it impossible for it to know if it was given a sort of uber-prompt about white genocide? (not rhetorical, really curious)
- @nytimes.com I don’t know what you thought you were doing here but there is a broad consensus TODAY. You are actively contributing to the possibility that unserious, broadly rejected arguments will be taken seriously.
- My professional constitutional law opinion: IT'S STILL FUCKING FRINGE!! I see Eastman and Wurman cited in here. I'm going to have a rage stroke. @evanbernick.bsky.social @bethanyberger.bsky.social @jnovkov.bsky.social @anthonymkreis.bsky.social @gowder.io Gift link
- it’s truly a shocking piece!
- I read this book in jury duty and thought I was having a hallucination or had grabbed a soft core porn version by accident.
- I read it while I was babysitting at a neighbor's house, I was 11 years old and it scarred me for LIFE, wtf, that opening scene!! (still grateful my parents never policed my reading, I'm not THAT scarred, but holy smokes, it left me full of questions and horror for a good while)
- this is 100% my own view (and innate ability) except that you DO have to use "which" for non-restrictive clauses, don't attempt "this clause, that is non-restrictive, gets commas," oceans will boil, mountains crumble etc
- a banger post, especially this closer:
- [Not loaded yet]
- I am honestly still not understanding your point at all, but that's okay, have a good day, friend
- at SEVEN? for food assistance they want to say a seven year old child is no longer dependent on their parents and can buy (forage? steal???) their own food?
- [Not loaded yet]
- "the Trump administration laced the media with suggestions that he is thinking about raising taxes on the rich" is in the first (single-sentence) paragraph, that seems like an entirely clear opening to me
- [Not loaded yet]
- not sure i understand what you’re saying
