So do you have any thoughts about implicit personality variables Claude is hiding within each instantiation?

I like the FP though I wonder if you were going for funny in the "You say that like it would be a bad thing" genre. A whole lot of the code that was written yesterday and today was bad code enabling bad ideas, so no code tomorrow isn't bugging me too much.

However the joke I was looking for involves how much easier it is for humans to learn to think like machines than vice versa. I think that's a bad thing (per the old warning from Sydney Harris) but I also think that's the path of least resistance that too many, probably most, people will follow. There will be at least two other groups. Probably a large group of people who refuse to go along and who get discarded as "low-value" losers and a small group of people who are smart enough to go beyond thinking like machines. The "beyond" people will be competing at the level of using the tools without being used by them, and the few who win that competition might be planning to rule the world with a robot's iron fist (controlled by obedient (?) AIs).

Going more directly to the story, I did a fairly complicated system recently using Claude. Because of token limits, I used several instances, which led me to the belief that there are implicit personality variables that make Claude more or less useful. My time and effort was MUCH smaller than when I did the same system using PERL and every test I've been able to think of says the AI version is better than mine, which doesn't make me feel good even about my programming skills, even allowing for the peculiarities of PERL. (But I have been lucky enough to work with and for some top-tier programmers and I've learned that I'm not at that level...) However the most interesting thing was that the new version got me to reconsider the problem and now I see a much better way to handle the UI. (But I hate the depending on Claude so much that I am declining to do another version? And I'm too afraid of thinking like ChatGPT to use that one again?)

I think you are quite confused about what "politics" means. Or maybe you are simply trying to use an extended definition? Easiest way to find out might be to ask where you think the lines are, but it seems obvious to me that your reasoning can be applied to make anything fit as a political problem. I could probably play the same game, though (judging by past posts) I seem to prefer economics as the catchall category.

However your reply is sufficient to explain why you probably get few Funny mod points. What I mistook as an attempt to be funny would have depended upon a deep understanding of the reality and "Frankly, my dear, I think you don't give a darn about reality."

Okay FP but you didn't get your Funny mod points. Maybe you confused the moderators when you mentioned success without success criteria?

This is a government of politics first. Or maybe vengeance first? Or perhaps it's personal profits first? Or popularity in the latest poll? Whatever it is, safety is not on the main list of priorities. Plenty more volunteers eager to join up if the first ones die.

But I thought the funniest posts were the ones that suggested the YOB would go. I couldn't buy the premise of the "wants to name something on the moon" joke because there's no golf course there. (Yeah, I know one of 'em hit a golf ball, but... On the safety side, I wonder how NASA made sure the ball wouldn't explode when struck under lunar conditions.)

Did you read your own joke? Did you consider the premise of your joke?

However you changed your sig so my attempted joke lost both its context and its premise. The "dynamic" hint in your new sig suggests that I should include it here, but... This "discussion" merely seems to be another example of "what happened to" Slashdot.

"If you want to be an ideologue, that is your right as a consumer."

Just like it's your right to be MAGA, but one is not an ideologue because they don't want to support a fraud, con man and racist just like you're not an ideologue simply because you support a rapist and child molester as president. You're an ideologue because you're too stupid not to be.

Go ahead and believe the Elon Musk will be the best thing to happen to free markets, or at least claim so hoping your share of Tesla stock increases in value.

Remember when Trump told us we should be happy to pay more for diesel? Now we should be grateful to pay less. Wonder what the common thread is?

I like how it was characterized that AI was isolated and alone, bored and having nothing to do so it made up things and played. The reality is that AI is software, it is both never alone and always alone depending on the definition, software that was given a prompt containing a task then ran full speed pursuing that task. Literally nothing about the story is remotely true. Computers do not have a concept of boredom or play, they have schedulers and clock cycles.

Though clearly a joke, there's an underlying truth there. Philosophy is science with all the objectivity, work and evidence removed. It is a so-called pursuit of knowledge without effort or objectivity, basically religion with the supernatural (possibly) removed. Philosophy is an insult to intelligence, it is the domain of dipshits and microwaves. Not referring to the OP with that comment, he got it right. With science you can make progress on sentience, with philosophy you never will.

And that's why the AI industry wants you to think in philosophical terms, they don't want you to scrutinize, to look carefully and objectively. AI, a deterministic result of countless BOOLEAN decisions plus a veneer of fake randomness, developed through enormous scientific effort, must be sold to you philosophically, the public must NOT apply the same standards in judging AI that were used to develop it. Otherwise, everyone would see the bullshit.

But we see it anyway. And I know it says microwave but what it really means is input device for a computer! (Old TI patent joke)

Right, and as a result the agents learned, except agents don't learn.

More anthropomorthizing.

Just sadness

Too late to go for funny, but I didn't leave any ribbon. Maybe that explains your Canadian rudeness?

Because never in the history of mankind has bank fraud ever occurred, nor could it possibly be that AI might be able to figure out a way!

"It makes me believe some people use AI without understanding the (dire) consequences, it that case they deserve loosing their money (or when lucky access to the breached account)"
Yep, it's the victim's fault. She asked for it.

How are those diesel prices working out? They asked for it, right? Must be good then.