nautilus12

It will inevitably lead to people not sharing their scientific results out publicly and just going directly to those who stand to benefit from them, if they know publishing means they will be immediately exploited by a single entity.

While i admire the nix community i don't know how people can be spending their time on it to solve the types of problems they are, when AI is shitting out bad python code quicker than anyone can keep up with that's degrading all our systems. By one token you can argue that's a way of fighting back, but maybe also a possible way to bury your head in the sand while the rest of the world burns around you.

You can only build skills in things that have consistent rules. LLMs have totally unpredictable outputs, attempting to build skills in prompting them is a waste of time on par with the madness of astrology or daytrading

Have any real mathematicians working on these problems reviewed any of these and determined if they are just gobbledegook or not?

The ones with lean proofs could still be formulated incorrectly

Ah i see what you were saying now, you were saying session specific poisoning is more likely to work if it was in tandem with training document specific poisoning.

Oh makes perfect sense, do you have thoughts about real life examples? I did some research using AI and it said there were examples of restricted 3 body problems like the trojan asteroids, but no examples in real life similar to what is in this web app

I was thinking to myself this dismal thought: everyone is so busy because of the acceleration caused by AI that no one will have the time to actually take the five minutes to verify manually that this really is a solution or that the article just generated something plausible looking

Is this assumed to be 2D? I was going to ask if there are any observed examples of 3 body equilibrium observed in nature.

This is the real issue, though this article does not really hit on it explicitly just alludes to it.

This should be a watershed moment for everyone using a commercial LLM. EVERY PIECE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY YOU DISCUSS WITH IT BECOMES THEIR PROPERTY. FULL STOP.

It is impossible to fight against this. It is statistically obfuscated, they can just argue it is a derived work.

I get jealous of people that have the luxury of time to do things like this

My issue is that taking a strictly GUI driven approach makes you build an application (in the browser presumably) that will require more permissions than you would typically want in the terminal so TUIs win out by being in proximity to those tools (cat, ls, rm, etc) for development use cases

I think the hope of the business end is that coding expertise will at some point no longer be needed at all.

Can they try to prove that he directed someone to direct the agent to do that?