SailingSperm

Love the idea - wonder if it can be worked directly in with a system prompt like 'write <bkspc> to nullify the closest preceding non-nullified word'. Then just parseing in the output. eg. "hi how are <bkspc> tall are <bkspc> <bkspc> do I talk" -- would resolve to "hi how do I talk"... Or maybe better with <bkspc[index#backFromThisPosition]>

Can't think of a good query to test it on that might need revision half way through...If anyone's got some ideas?

I do find with some coding problems LLMs can start a solution then as it describes its solution it needs to contradict what it has said earlier from it providing/working out itself more context to the problem.

Seems a little sensitive... Prompt: "Taiwan" === ''' This prompt is being reviewed We're taking a closer look to make sure this prompt doesn't conflict with our content policy. '''

Interesting getting that terse response from gtp4. I got a seemingly far more considered and practical response from 3.5...Seems it may be that gtp4 is accounting better for the light hearted / non-seriousness of the question and responding in turn with a fairly non-serious resp.

3.5-turbo:

As a language model, I cannot say for certain how a whale would perceive or understand the concept of being wet. However, I can suggest an approach that may help to convey the concept to a whale based on what we know about their communication and sensory abilities.

Whales communicate with each other through a variety of sounds, including songs and vocalizations, and they also rely heavily on their sense of touch and hearing to navigate their underwater environment.

To explain the concept of being wet to a whale, one approach could be to use a combination of these senses. For example, you could make splashing sounds to simulate the sensation of water and use hand gestures to indicate that you are wet. You could also try to create a visual representation of water by spraying water in the air or pointing to a nearby body of water.

Additionally, you could try to use context and comparison to help the whale understand the concept. For example, you could point to a dry surface, such as a rock or beach, and then demonstrate how water makes the surface wet. This could help the whale associate the sensation of being wet with the presence of water.

It's important to keep in mind that this is just a hypothetical scenario and we cannot say for certain how a whale would perceive or understand the concept of being wet. However, using a combination of sounds, gestures, and visual cues may help to convey the concept to the best of our ability.

They're saying there's a distinction of being able to communicate freely (and possibly lie) while still not showing your final action to defect or cooperate. Which yes, leaves the prisoners dilemma much the same as the 0 forms of comms version.

>the advocacy of a small government is exactly _more_ situations like FTX. Arguably not true. The presence of large government and pervasive regulation may behave like the bike helmet paradox (Where cyclists feel they are able to take more risk while wearing a helmet, and motorists drive more carefully around helmet-less riders). Smaller gov in this case may lead to individuals feeling less like the government has vetted xyz investment opportunity and therefore may feel a need to do their own due diligence more thoroughly.

>Can you explain how this standard of rigueur leads to anything less than a complete halting of medical research?

~10 yrs of trials and safety data collecting (Including long term studies) is the historical norm. We've certainly not had a complete halting of medical research from doing that.

My main point though is that with the level of data provided and the fact long term studies have not, and cannot have been conducted in this time frame - the push to mandate (and coercively pressure vaccination uptake through fear of losing your job, or access to regular life things bars, cafes, travel etc.) is unjustified and arguably doesn't even reach the bar for informed consent (with many people getting it under the impression it would prevent contraction and transmission).

Though, firing medical staff based on vaccine status(that has little impact on transmission) while saying "we need all the medical staff we can get to ensure healthcare facilities don't collapse" doesn't square up. Here in Australia it's still the case that our hospital staff require the vax, while we're deeply unstaffed. It begs the question if their exclusion is of any net gain to society despite the ostensible risk they pose to patients, or if their ability to contribute to the healthcare workforce would outweigh that 'risk'.

Nice, the inbuilt levels editor after they're generated is a nice touch.