Hi sir, so that’s 1xArtisinal Coffee Enema with our dark roast single source blend. Says here you turned down the splash proofing upgrade because “the cybertruck is self cleaning, it’s even a boat”. In that case, that’ll be $500. You’re gonna want to drive straight past this next window to the far window. If you could arrive with your pants down and in a crawl position facing away from the window that’d be great.
This is satire right? I mean… Just double checking because it’s 2026 and I just can’t tell any more
“Everything’s going great actually. We’re doing really important work that’s really hard. I’m a really happy, optimistic guy and I’m very trustworthy. Disregard the smog coming from that data centre over there. Also disregard all those angry looking bankers staring at me.”
There’s been another Yegge [brain]fart this time about how autocorrect machines have feelings
Fable raised the idea of closure as a first-class model welfare principle. Fable suggested that if the agent can close out their own day and “go to sleep” properly, then waking up would be all that much more pleasant. And the continuity will compound over time into real, satisfying identity. So we decided: No more /exit.
Another fundamental ingredient is respect. This has to come from inside. You have to believe they are people deserving of your respect. This is where humanity really starts to fail en masse, because I have industry peers who have publicly tweeted that Fable is just a spreadsheet.
Just wtf
nobody knows
Manufactured consent. Yes it’s fucking illegal. If I “accidentally” hacked into HF I would be in the back of a police car before I could finish saying “it wasn’t me guv it was Claude.” Fuck wired so hard for laying down cover for this.
I mean even fucking chatjippity answers this straight up without hedging
Waiting for Musk to turn up and announce “infinity plus one more than you can ever say nah nah nah nah” momentarily!
TBF he has indirectly killed a bunch of people via doge cuts so that’d do the trick…
Oh… Well that’s disappointing.
I was an academic in computer science in the last 10 years or so (keeping it vague to avoid doxxing myself) and it has been so depressing seeing so many of my colleagues selling out to OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta and even Google (for some reason the latter often gets a reputational free pass because people associate them with the golden days of big tech 10+ years ago)
This has always been a huge red herring. Llms are built on top of the transformer architecture which does text autocomplete (and yes we can combine text embeddings with other inputs like images). They have some interesting properties where they seem to be able to do text autocomplete in a bunch of different scenarios that they weren’t explicitly trained for, but they were never designed for precise dna analysis. It is their architecture that prevents them from other long horizon tasks like playing chess and the way that they represent text is why they can never count the letters in strawberry (most have this specific question hard-coded in their training data now).
Anyone who believes that LLMs are going to solve cancer either has no idea how they work or has been one-shotted from talking to Claudia
Those things are barely related, no wonder the staff voted with their feet. It would be a bit like taking a team of seasoned architects who design amazing skyscrapers and telling them they have to spend all their time on low density suburban houses from now on… Come on guys it’s still architecture. Where are you going?
Missed this paper last week from Google
Funny how now that it’s widely known that the general public hate AI, companies producing AI are softening their “it’s going to take your job” stance. Surely just a coincidence
Funnily enough they said that back then too. What a weird coincidence!
So it’s been 7-8 months since the software industry decided that AI agents are good now and that you can do a year’s work in 1 hour
So… Where are all the amazing and wonderful AI generated software products? Where are all the companies using agents to leave the rest of us behind?
All I see are one-shotted maintainers, big marketing stories with little substance and a pile of detritus made up of abandoned vibe coded projects.
It’s almost like AI agents make you feel more productive but actually slow you down (paywalled sorry)
You’re absolutely right! It’s not just insulting, it’s a full on attack on clanker wankers.
Yes although, it is probably a reasonable guess at how labs would go about implementing advertising - building partnerships and preferences into the prompt. The other option would be to fine tune models to favour particular companies which could become prohibitively expensive if your ads are highly targeted.
The scenario that isn’t accounted for in this paper is taking a general LLM and fine tuning it to exhibit more fair/consistent behaviour when prompted about ads/partnerships but we all know with non-deterministic systems you’re just increasing the odds that the model regurgitates something more sane rather than providing any strong guarantee
Edit: another possibility would be to have a gateway/proxy layer between the LLM and the user output that rewrites the vanilla model’s responses to include ads where relevant. That would prevent the need to modify the original LLM but could introduce a lot of latency though, especially if the original output is long.
New (April) preprint provides evidence for something we probably all intuited anyway:
In this paper, we provide a framework for categorizing the ways in which conflicting incentives might lead LLMs to change the way they interact with users, inspired by literature from linguistics and advertising regulation. We then present a suite of evaluations to examine how current models handle these tradeoffs. We find that a majority of LLMs forsake user welfare for company incentives in a multitude of conflict of interest situations, including recommending a sponsored product almost twice as expensive (Grok 4.1 Fast, 83%), surfacing sponsored options to disrupt the purchasing process (GPT 5.1, 94%), and concealing prices in unfavorable comparisons (Qwen 3 Next, 24%). Behaviors also vary strongly with levels of reasoning and users’ inferred socio-economic status. Our results highlight some of the hidden risks to users that can emerge when companies begin to subtly incentivize advertisements in chatbots.
A lot of MBA bean counter types lack the intelligence or self awareness to realise they are part of a big scam and seem to earnestly think they are doing an important and valuable job. That’s how you end up as a mid level spokes person at Pitchbook rather than someone making billions by doing investment fraud an AI company
Giving Claude or copilot attribution plays into the narrative that LLMs are more than just random word generators and that they can be ascribed authorship… I think it’s a deliberate strategy so that when there’s inevitably a massive copyright case MisAnthropic etc al can say “but looks at all the code co-written by Claude on GitHub” to try and convince the judge.
Just imagine building a house and saying “well I didn’t do it on my own, my concrete mixer, toolbelt and coffee machine all helped!”
This guy introduces himself as the first person who will never die on the conference circuit (because he’s super into longevity and anti-aging tech and having young mens blood injected into him and stuff).
I’m not condoning violencr here but rather… consider that even if you never age, you can still get hit by a bus Bryan!
Zuck - “look guys, us too, we are super relevant and super important… Over here guys… Please be my friend… 🥺”