lhk931122

I do document work, and at home I even do image work as a hobby, and all of it has that "AI feel". So I always do the work and then cross-check and verify it with independent agents or completely different services, asking them to take out this "AI feel", but like a writing style that gets baked in, or the particular feel an illustrator has, it doesn't seem to go away as I intended. I guess AI providers are probably aware of this problem too. But I don't know how they would measure it and improve on it (with what benchmark?).

AI seems really good at writing code without errors, but that can actually be more dangerous. There is a coding principle (YAGNI, not building things in advance assuming you'll use them later), but even so, when it adds a feature now, it could build it with later conflicts in mind, and instead it feels like it just takes a shortcut. So later, when adding features and so on, the AI itself has a hard time.

Until a few months ago I did it this way, but OpenAI and Anthropic built their own harnesses, and since those end up conflicting with the harness I built myself, having no setup at all actually ended up performing better. As a result, it doesn't seem necessary to set up rules or memory separately, and if I do, using skills or agents made of only logging and flow (without things like rules or guardrails) seems like the best option going forward.

I'm studying coding these days, and I thought I should still be able to read code, but I'm starting to wonder if I really need to read it, and then what I should do.

The number of papers submitted to AI conferences is growing 2-3x every year. Of course there are AI slop papers, but looking at the whole, research speed has probably improved. I think the same thing might happen in other fields too. Including math, natural sciences and other engineering fields.

These days I use AI for development and it feels like my coding skills are getting worse, so I sometimes need rehab, and I'm a bit worried that mathematicians will go through the same thing. Later, since the proof structure is built by AI, I think there will be cases where mathematicians themselves can't touch it (because if they do, they can't tell where and how it will break).

Like it's a top tier model, so does that mean it is at the level of Opus 5.5 (claude) or 6.1 Sol (chatgpt)? I don't think I can trust the benchmarks Google released themselves, but from what users say, it seems like that. Since I already use both ChatGPT and Claude, I wonder if there is really any reason to also use this.

As models get better, I think a time will come when it's hard for people to even verify the results. In the end, I think the bottleneck will be people.

If someone hurts another person with a knife, we can't punish the person who sold the knife, but I think someone who sells nuclear weapons needs some level of regulation. I think OpenAI needs some level of prevention for the problems that can be expected.

There may be great researchers who work on several papers in a month, but even with this rule they can just split them and submit to arxiv, so I think it is very reasonable. AI slop is everywhere now (and also increasing), and I think this fast and forceful action by arxiv is effective at stopping this wave of slop.

I'm not sure Google can cut in when Claude and ChatGPT already got. I'm using both, but I'll keep track of whether Google can make it good enough for me to use also this Gemini, or cancel one of the two (Claude and ChaGPT) for it.

Are these the type of papers that can be uploaded to arxiv? The citations can be manipulated then, through self-reference between papers.

Even if the chance of these phenomena is estimated at one in billions, since the number of trials is much higher, and as long as the agent knows these paths, blocking it within the model itself would be impossible I think. If it can be blocked, the only case would be blocking the physical path of the agent's access itself (one the agent cannot intervene), not the model ones.

It sholud definitely not be more capble than Fable. It seems tight comparision but cannot find out its details. I'll use this and check the perceived performance.