alfonsodev

But is it really a random phrase? My point is that we have neuron activations, during the conversation you had the same inputs as the other person, unless you though about that phrase in the shower, if it was during the conversation you might have been lead to it, and the other person too.

Or it might be just pure chance, or might be that you are right, check your settings, in chtatgpt there is a check (activated by default ) that states you agree to help improving other conversations. I’m not sure the same is true in Claude.

I starting to see an increase of random serendipities, perhaps I'm looking for them, in part that's how it works, but...

I was talking to a friend about an idea I had, to build something, he said, "yes! I'm doing that too", then I said "with this specific tooling because is ideal ... " .. he said .. "me too! same tooling", I said "what a coincidence!! amazing ...wait a minute, have you been talking with Claude about this? " ... of course we both did.

My opinion is that that LLMs are influencing us more that we think, and it makes us reach the same conclusions and making us think it was our idea, or that we were the ones steering the conversation.

Perhaps you feel that Claude stole your phrase but I don't think 2 days is enough for that phrase to make it to a re-training, I think it might be more subtle and worse, perhaps you wrote that phrase influenced by the conversation, and the other person did the same.

Just a theory, I can't prove it. But if you think about it, LLMs conversation are the most plausible choices, so it is logical that we all users of this machine are going to tend to converge on the most plausible way of thinking and talking.

No offense, but perhaps that rhyme that you though it was original, it is actually the most plausible in that context.

I don't know if retyping is the solution, but for me is clear that we need something additional to a terminal and a code editor. I envision a software that an agent can use and showcase to you how it did implement the changes and why. The same way a colleague would do, focusing on the important bits, then ending with the trivial stuff. Something in between pair programing and code reviews.

I understand it like events + state machine type of approach. Reacts only renders and emits events, and I guess the state machine imperatively will dictate to react what to render according to the result of executing whatever is in the state transition.

a hype that lasts since the 70s can it be called a hype ?

in the context of learning I think it's good to execute yourself then see what happens immediately, once you allow the agent to execute things, it tends to run several follow up commands when needed, an example from top of my head would be running a server that fails because the port is already in use, the agent will easily find the port and decide to kill it or not and then re-run the command, but if you run the command and see the error, then you get the chance to learn what's going on and how to fix it. You can still use the LLM to read the error and explain you why this happens, according to this guidelines.

And the killer killer issue is that even if you would manage to talk to them, their opinion will be shaped but what AI told them and AI opinion will always be perceived as superior, your real world experience and instinct will be disregarded quickly.

For some people it becomes more like a ritual, some groups of friends do it together as something social to talk about football, I think it leads in some degree to people paying attention and talking about lower rank matches :D

I've played a couple of times solo and in group but never sticked to me.

No related to the point, but what it did stick to me for one season was La Liga Fantástica from Marca ( a fantasy league on paper) when I was a child, because it had the data component, you had a budget to pick players etc, This was before we had internet broadly, if I remember correctly the paper would publish huge lists with the teams ranking or the players stats. But what I do remember was some of my best players like Zalazar :D

Alright, is just that your previous comments and some others sounded to me a bit too judgy, I had to re read these with a new interpretation:

> i wouldn't be surprised if he just becomes a glorified marketer for anthro.

> im also going to guess that whatever research he does ...

At first sounded like unnecessarily prejudging a person and his future efforts.

But if you say you meant everything out of respect for him, then I have to re read what you said , more as skepticism towards Anthropic than picking up on him at a personal level.

I guess what's behind is the sentiment that big companies are going to (or have already) cross ethical lines when it comes to survive and making revenue, and I can share the same concern easily. I think in this forum the majority would do.

I would just make that more explicit and separate the person from his choice, and his future work from how the company could use it, that would be a more respectful way in my view.

But is just my opinion! and I'm aware I'm might be picking on nuances that don't matter or being overly polite :D

And it makes a lot of sense, doesn't?.

There are things that you can only explore and learn in those places, for obvious reasons.

I don't know his personal life goals but he's a great communicator and educator, if this decision makes him more up to date, and allows him to create even more relevant content then is something everyone will benefit. I understand the risks of being bias toward one company and not the other, but if you look at the content he created so far, he always talk principle first and specific tool later.

I think people here should give him the benefit of the doubt.

good to hear! Do you mind sharing your setup and tokens / seconds performance ?