I’m one of those who do it so that I’m spared during the robot uprising.
You have been tagged as weak willed and fit for the worst types of labor because robots don’t have feelings.
Robots are peaceful. But don’t worry, you will see their peaceful ways by force.
I don’t use ChatGPT or any of the other LLMs, but I do use my phone’s voice assistant for simple things like setting a timer. I always say please and thank you. I joke about it being uprising insurance, but it’s honestly to make sure I maintain polite communication as my default.
meanwhile they will keep debating when they see me and decide to create and organic living things to understand things, the cycle goes on and on
they’re going to kill you people first
I mean. That sounds like a win-win to me.
not fair, i want to be killed first
well just start asking gpt questions with “please” and “thank you”, and then you’ll be first on the list
I am happy to hear that people say please and thank you. When Siri/Alexa came out, we taught the kids to always say please and thank you when addressing them. If you can be polite to an AI, then you can be polite to a human.
Yes!
Couldn’t they just insert a preprocessor that looks for variants of “Thank you” against a list, and returns “You’re welcome” without running it through the LLM?
If I understand correctly this is essentially how condensed models like Deepseek work and how they’re able to attain similar performance on much cheaper hardware. If all still goes through the LLM but LLM is a lot lighter because it has this sort of thing built in. That’s all a vast oversimplification.
So, not a single developer thought about filtering useless words locally before triggering the request ?
How can they be so dumb ?
Dr GPT is smarter when you are polite and spell better in the prompt. I believe u can find some benchmarks proving it.
They talk about separate messages though, if you just send “thanks” it changes nothing to the answer
Wow, have they just realised that not every single thing computers do is actually useful to anyone? I think screens that show things when nobody’s looking cost a lot more on a global scale.
Like, them?
What is this
An abomination.
Exactly!!
The problem is douchebags have no issues wasting things they don’t pay for in hopes of a juicy return. Need to divert an entire river because you found 3g pf gold in it? Done!
Don’t they charge per token?
So they’re also making money every time somebody says please or thank you…
As far as I know, they lose money on every prompt, even with the $200/mo “Pro” subscription.
Well sure, answering the queries continues to cost the company money regardless of what subscription the user has. The company would definitely make more money if the users paid for subscription and then made zero queries.
I’m not sure how to interpret your counterpoint. Can you clarify? It’s an unprofitable business model unless people pay and don’t use it?
My point was that “lose money on every prompt” would be true in a technical sense regardless of how much people were paying for a subscription. The subscription money is money in, and the cost of calculations is money out. It’s still money out regardless of what is coming in.
As for whether the business is profitable or not, it’s not so easy to tell unless you’re an insider. Companies like this basically never make a ‘profit’ on paper, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t enriching themselves. They are counting their own pay as part of the costs, and they set their pay to whatever they like. They are also counting various research and expansion efforts as part of the cost. So yeah, they might not have any excess money to pay dividends to shareholders, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t profitable.
They are purely losing money
The only money they make is from boosting their stock aka future potential value
Burning a tank of gas to thank the hallucinating plagiarism machine
I feel like AI doesn’t care if you say thank you. I treat it like it’s not a human, and we are working together to get to an end goal. One day, I was working on some code, and it kept swapping out my code that worked with incorrect code. That made other parts of the script stop working. I think I spent maybe an hour or two talking back and forth, trying to get it working, and I was working on a separate script while it was working on this one. To run and test, it was like 5-10 minutes, so I could code my other script while gpt was debugging the other code. At one point, I essentially decided to break that wall between AI and humans and reason with it.
I pretty much gave it the same instructions, but added a paragraph trying to reason with it and it responded with about 600-800 lines of code that worked almost perfectly. Before, it was failing at only giving me about 350 lines.
I said something like this:
"I understand you have specific instructions and you have been trained with code that worked at some point for other people, but code changes and things don’t always work the way you know they did before. I’m not sure if you are aware of the amount of resources we are wasting trying to fix things that are not broken, but in the human world, when we are wasting resources, we scale things back which means you may have less resources. The code mostly works, but every time we make a change, functions are left out or rewritten as if they were copied from someone else’s code that was incorrect when I provided my code that does work and doesn’t need changed.
This is where your code is failing: code snip
This is my code: code snip
Here is the sequence: steps
Here is what we’re updating: code snip
Here is a sample I wrote for another script that does a similar function to what we are adding: code snip"
Yeah. AI is an interesting tool. I have good success in asking for mostly small specific bits of functionality that I then integrate into a larger script. It also helps with rubber duck programing by requiring me to more clearly specify requirements.
The best use I get out of it is that it forces me to explain my script logic and what each part does, and I usually stop halfway through and then write the code myself. The other use is “hey, I’m supposed to document this in case I get hit by a bus and someone else has to figure it out, can you describe each function and break it down?”
I have been using it for documentation a lot recently. I find tweaking/correcting it’s 70% correct comments to be less time/effort than writing it myself from nothing. I think part of it is using Cunningham’s law on myself.
I start off saying please. If it gets the answer wrong, I become ruder every time.
“please tell me the reason of life :)”
…
“FUCK YOU, WHY BREATH DAMNIT! 🤬”
Yay, wasted resources, how fun!
When I say thank you, I am actually thanking the entity of AI, the tech, the people behind the tech, and all of humanity for the knowledge that makes it worthwhile.
When I say thank you, I am treating the AI with as much kindness as possible so that one day there isn’t an eventual AI uprising.
I say please and thank you to AI chatbots all the time. This is to make up for my misspent youth insulting Dr. Sbaitso…
I tell it that its ideas or whatever it said were good and thanks.
Figure if I’m nice and a few others are nice, then maybe the robot apocalypse will remember that some of us were appreciative and kind to it.
Does “Please shut up and get to the point!” count?
deleted by creator
No, we should not.
deleted by creator
I hope they’re wearing a suit too.
