Wilduck
Joined 17 years ago
Joined 17 years ago
Looking at your set of steps, I'm definitely getting lost around step 3 "The program then guides you one step at a time. Each step is a small module: a short assessment (a few structured questions), a task, a referral, a verification, and so on. It adapts to your answers rather than dumping a wall of text." Am I wrong that this flow is not built yet? Or is completely inaccessible to me?
Like, looking at the program page https://dohmh.codify.nyc/program/71776 I don't see how I can follow any of the steps. You say this is drawn from DOHMH pages, so I found the corresponding one for this program: https://www.nyc.gov/site/doh/health/health-topics/stay-healt.... I think this page is miles better than what you've built for a few reasons:
1. It comes with context in the form of paragraphs of explanation 2. It doesn't use undefined words like "program", "agent", "target". No where on that page is a string like "PersonalPrepTaskAgent". 3. It provides links to more resources, also written in nice human readable language
I don't want to be too hard on your project though. I've had to interact with the Pennsylvania DMV website a number of times, and trying to understand how to meet the requirements for a residential parking permit when I moved into my house was crazy because I needed some non-standard documentation due to having out-of-state plates. I would have loved a someone to break down the steps to me in very clear, understandable language. But I'm not sure your site is doing that right now.
As a last note, I wouldn't say you're "spamming" the comments, but I might recommend reaching out to potential users directly and asking them for harsh feedback. Posting into the void here clearly isn't getting you enough actionable feedback.
Your link to an example protocol: https://dohmh.codify.nyc/protocol/71776 makes basically zero sense to me. Similarly the program page. What do you expect someone clicking on these links to take away from them?
So when you say "Nope!", you're being downvoted because you're implicitly saying "actually users don't deserve choice".
If I found out a player had come to the table with an LLM generated character, I would feel a pretty big betrayal of trust. It doesn't matter to me how "good" or "polished" their ideas are, what matters is that they are their own.
Similarly, I would be betraying my players by using an LLM to generate content for our shared game. I'm not just an officiant of rules, I'm participating in shared storytelling.
I'm sure there are people who play DnD for reasons other than storytelling, and I'm totally fine with that. But for storytelling in particular, I think LLM content is a terrible idea.
> "What does 'LOQ' mean in your results? > > Limit of Quantification (LOQ) is the lowest concentration we can reliably measure. Results below LOQ are marked "<LOQ" - this doesn't mean zero, just below our measurement threshold."
IMO this definition should be on every results page, since most of the pages have more LOQs than anything else.