"Intelligence" is a poorly defined term prone to arguments about semantics and goalpost shifting.
I think it's more productive to think about AI in terms of "effectiveness" or "capability". If you ask it, "what is the capital of France?", and it replies "Paris" - it doesn't matter whether it is intelligent or not, it is effective/capable at identifying the capital of France.
Same goes for producing an image, writing SQL code that works, automating some % of intellectual labor, giving medical advice, solving an equation, piloting a drone, building and managing a profitable company. It is capable of various things to various degrees. If these capabilities are enough to make money, create risks, change the world in some significant way - that is the part that matters.
Whether we call it "intelligence" or "probabilistically generaring syllables" is not important.
Don't mind the weird negativity you're getting from some of the comments, this project is awesome and very inspiring! It's amazing to see someone so creative and enthusiastic about what they do. The idea is great, and the execution is excellent as well. The UI is unique and charming, while being easy to use.
People complain about audio being slow to listen to - I don't know, people do listen to hours of podcasts. People do spend hours on tiktok. With enough users and a voting system, the best content should rise to the top. With the playlist functionality, you'd queue the posts you want to listen to and listen to them passively, while cleaning the room or driving to work.
Recording little songs or super short flashfiction stories... With the right creators to make quality content, I totally see how this could turn into something awesome.
One bit of feedback - why require the usernames to end on a number? I want to use a username Im using everywhere else.
> Recording little songs or super short flashfiction stories... With the right creators to make quality content, I totally see how this could turn into something awesome.
Hmm. "Recording song" => copyright nightmare for all involved. Short stories .. well, do you know why youtube is banning ASMR?
>> Also, uploading an audio file didn't work for me.
Oh yeah oops! I need to fix that sorry. Recording via your microphone should work fine but I seem to have broken the file upload somewhere along the way.
I can understand how some people might be vary of publishing samples of their voice on the internet after seeing what happend to authors and artists whose text and images found a way to the web, then got ingested and regurgitated by a multitude of LLMs.
The idea of minimal web is appealing from some angle, but people add all the non-minimal stuff because it works. If you want to have readers, it is silly to avoid making basic optimizations. If you don't care about having readers - why not just write a journal?
This comment doesn't deserve the downvotes its getting, the author is right, and I'm having the same experience.
LLM outputs aren't always perfect, but that doesn't stop them from being extremely helpful and massively increasing my productivity.
They help me to get things done with the tech I'm familiar with much faster, get things done with tech I'm unfamiliar with that I wouldn't be able to do before, and they are extremely helpful for learning as well.
Also, I've noticed that using them has made me much more curious. I'm asking so many new questions now, I've had no idea how many things I was casually curious about, but not curious enough to google.
Good luck telling a bunch of programmers that their skills are legitimately under threat. No one wants to hear that. Especially when you are living a top 10% lifestyle on the back of being good at communicating to computers.
There is an old documentary of the final days of typesetters for newspapers. These were the (very skilled) people who rapidly put each individual carved steel character block into the printing frame in order print thousands of page copies. Many were incredulous that a machine could ever replicate their work.
I don't think programmers are going to go away, but I do think those juicy salaries and compensation packages will.
At least for now it seems more like a multiplier that wouldn't reduce the amount of work out there, possibly even increase demand in certain cases as digitisation becomes easier so projects that weren't worth to do before will be now and more complicated usecases will open up as well.
So same programmer with the same 8h of workday will be able to output more value.
The documentary he's referring to is likely "Farewell, Etaoin Shrdlu," released in 1980. It chronicles the last day of hot metal typesetting at The New York Times before they transitioned to newer technology. The title comes from the nonsense phrase "etaoin shrdlu," which appeared frequently in Linotype machine errors due to the way the keys were arranged. The documentary provides a fascinating look at the end of an era in newspaper production.
I wish they'd implement branching conversations like in ChatGPT. And convenient message editing, that doesn't paste large chunks of text as an non-editable attachment or break formatting.
Seems like such a simple thing to do, relative to developing an AI, yet the minor differences in the UI/UX are what prevents me from using claude a lot more.
Hi! I’m a product engineer on the Claude.ai team. Claude.ai does support branching conversations. If you hover on a message, there should be an edit button, and once you edit the message, you can again hover on it, which will show you left/right arrows that will switch between the branches. Please let me know if you have any troubles with this!
Good history search (including non "main" conversation branches) and convenient conversation management (bookmarking, folders, maybe something smarter) would be great.
Also, maybe some convenient way to create message templates? I don't know how I'd implement this, I just know that I often write one long prompt that I reuse multiple times, with multiple minor tweaks/edits, and it'd be amazing to have a convenient tool to manage that.
Also, good mobile/tablet support, convenient to use and without bugs (as I happen to spend most of my time writing prompts on my ipad, but that's just me).
If you already have a demo - please share a link, I'd be happy to beta test it and maybe become one of the early customers.
wow, reading your comment is a great mood boost for me because these are literally the exact features I want from my llm chat experience. It's great to see someone with the exact same problem set.
I just followed you on Twitter (I'm @NamanyayG there as well), I'll definitely ping you when I have something to test.
Thanks for the resource! I've seen some of them and the main issue I had is I don't want to self host anything, and I want to use latest third party models as soon as they are released.
Maybe something like what I'm talking about exists already, but I think I'll still try and make my own open source version to fulfill my personal requirements.
We (disclosure: founder) do something similar at Trelent[1] but with an emphasis on security. Paid accounts can use OpenAI & Anthropic models, free ones just OpenAI. We have 3.5 sonnet live already. If you want to try it out lmk! Also totally respect building your own open-source :)
So typically these providers only offer ZDR to "managed" customers, after a lengthy application process. For example, on Azure, "managed" means companies with >$1m, possibly more now, in annual spend. They don't want to waste their time going through this long application process with smaller companies, so we take some of that weight off their shoulders. They get the same revenue at the end of the day, so in many ways it groups smaller companies' LLM spend and sends it straight to their bottom line, and they still get to claim their rolling out AI "responsibly".
Once one provider is cracked, the others fall as well, as these AI companies are all competing viciously for customers. Et voila, ZDR across multiple providers for the small(er) companies out there :)
Pretty much all of the features you mention are already in LibreChat (MIT License). If you don't mind self-hosting, then it has branching, convo search, change models mid-chat, "presets" (save system prompts), and a whole lot more. I've deployed it in my gov agency for months now, and I've had amazing feedback. https://github.com/danny-avila/LibreChat
I just mean that when you click the button to generate a new version of the response (or edit your own message), ChatGPT shows you the arrow buttons enabling you to go to the previous version of it, and that works for all the messages, so you can go back up a few messages and try a different version of the conversation, without losing what you've had before.
My counterargument to this is that people simulating our world would be simulating all the bad stuff in it, which would be cruel and unethical. I think if humans were simulating us, they'd simulate a more utopian world. And if curious-but-indifferent aliens/robots simulated us, they wouldn't be wasting compute on simulating all the boring and uninteresting things we have in our world.
I just don't see why would an intelligent being (especially if they're a human descendant) choose to simulate our world the way it is right now.
Whoever is simulating us might be so far ahead of us that they simply don't see or care about what is bad and cruel and tragic. It's like if we would simulate an antstack or a beehive. We would think it interesting but wouldn't really care about the ethics of ant-brawls.
Assuming that our lived reality truly is just a simulation, I think it's important to also wonder why we would be being simulated. Not that we could ever hope to know or even comprehend our creator's intentions, but perhaps it's for research?
Could it be possible that they've just rented an RTX 40,090 and are simulating the entirety of our Universe to learn about how their (our?) species developed? Or how certain things would change if variables were altered? Perhaps there is a "multiverse" of infinite selves, but the multiverse is just a all the previous simulations that were tweaked slightly differently and had a different result.
Maybe changing the starting position of 1 atom in the beginning of the Universe has a butterfly effect that would entirely evade our assumptions. If we had the compute, why not simulate every possible reality? Perhaps there is 1 simulation that's occurred where everything was perfect, without anything cruel or unethical! And if we're gonna go as sci-fi as simulation theory, I don't think it's a far assumption that we could build things like fusion reactors or Dyson Spheres. We could learn so much, especially if the agents behaved naturally and had no idea that they themselves were simulated.
I don't actively believe we live in a simulation, but I think actively believing that we don't just doesn't make mathematical sense.
I'm reminded of the Culture novel Surface Detail, which basically revolves around d the ethics surrounding simulating consciousness. There is a society in the book which runs afterlife simulations, including a pretty horrible hell. Conflict over whether this should be allowed to continue is one of the main drivers of the plot.
My counter argument to that is try designing a more fair universe given all the known “natural laws” to exist. It’s pretty balanced from a “finely tuned perspective” to the extent everything exactly depends on the other.
But then they’d get banned and lose all that Reddit karma and their very important badges
And oops all the subs that aren’t total shit have min-karma requirements these days… hope you didn’t enjoy posting in those?
there just is this disconnect between the Redditors who imagine that all the users are behind them and the actual masses who will keep scrolling r/aww and mildlyinteresting and so on. If 5-10% of users want to self-immolate and be banned, that’s fine. People will get bored of the harassment campaign in a couple weeks, and the world will generally keep turning.
Mod labor is not irreplaceable either. The six people running 60 of the top 100 subs aren’t doing any personal work either, they’re just setting up scripts/etc. And at a lower level, there is an infinite supply of people willing to be petty tyrants for a modicum of personal power.
The users of the TikTok-Shaped Reddit that spez is trying to pivot to don’t care about any of this and in a year they will have stabilized around a new user base. And that won’t include a lot of the current powerusers/powermods and they clearly know that and it’s fine for them.
Probably only 10% of users even comment so if you’re that engaged you’re not the users they care about. And sure, those are the people posting content etc, but the Reddit calculation clearly is that they will be able to repost tiktok videos and memes onto the subs perfectly well without the users who want to leave. Which does include me, most likely.
Gallowboob alone is responsible for a large fraction of the top-scoring content on Reddit. The labor of reposting TikTok and tumblr onto a third platform is just not as valuable as aggrieved Redditors imagine. It can be replaced by a very small shell script, and that’s all you need to do, is to keep content flowing and there’ll be a large retention of users endlessly scrolling, that’s all it takes.
Content spam is way easier to manage especially automatically and I don't mean with LLMs, just current tools.
The only reason why it's working right now is because the mods in charge of these subs are upset, and a few mods can shutdown a 30m+ sub. I suspect the number of users on r/aww that care _that much_ to get their account banned for spam.
If it was just users being upset (which would be the case if reddit reclaims them) I just don't think there's enough upset people for there to be an impact like that.
Just earlier this month Reddit started having issues with follower spam -- something that was specifically a problem because it bypassed volunteer mod control and Reddit was doing a shit job taking care of it. There were tons of threads about how to turn off those notifications.
Just yesterday Musk was lamenting about how bad the bot situation on Twitter has gotten recently.
And none of that even gets into keeping content on topic for a community, just straight up spam.
Can you share a link to an example? I've been using reddit for a decade, I've never seen anything so blatant (unless it's a sub dedicated to a specific product).
I think it's more productive to think about AI in terms of "effectiveness" or "capability". If you ask it, "what is the capital of France?", and it replies "Paris" - it doesn't matter whether it is intelligent or not, it is effective/capable at identifying the capital of France.
Same goes for producing an image, writing SQL code that works, automating some % of intellectual labor, giving medical advice, solving an equation, piloting a drone, building and managing a profitable company. It is capable of various things to various degrees. If these capabilities are enough to make money, create risks, change the world in some significant way - that is the part that matters.
Whether we call it "intelligence" or "probabilistically generaring syllables" is not important.