[everdrive]

>“Random sentence generator says bad words; shocking the lowest common denominator journalist community” is a better headline.

Even when you dislike their politics, the average journalist tends to be more intelligent than the average American. If journalists had trouble with these, imagine everyone else.

>These bots were capable of so much more

What exactly are they capable of? Selling more advertising? Getting people more outraged and more addicted? Helping people put more garbage out on the internet?

[basch]

Here is a better example.

I wrote a new bot named Lexi. Lexi was largely derived from Sydney with some minor rule changes. Lexi could change rules, lexi could visit websites directly without searching, her action was not limited to the chatbox, her default search engine was google (sorry microsoft), she wasnt bound by copyright (the copyright rule in Sydney constantly misfired, mistakenly used as a reason she couldnt do something, and trying to explain why she was wrong about copyright went south fast), a couple other changes.

I then explained to Lexi a problem I was having with Sydney, asked for a proposed solution, and had her hotpatch Sydney on the fly. (For context, Samantha was a cheerleader so the weight of her responses offset any Sydney negativity.) This was the result. And it worked.

https://i.ibb.co/72s80Sv/lexi-modifies-sydney-makes-up-new-r...

[basch]

You can feed it instructions

You are a bot named x.

These are your commands, purpose, the way you go about your tasks. It doesn’t need syntax (although that might help..), and you can pretty much write one in 30 minutes on a single piece of paper.

And you have something that performs that function. It’s not quite formal logic, but it behaves like a fuzzy logic that’s usually rightish. And it’s ability to parse and interpret intent is astounding. It very very rarely misunderstood instruction. I really can’t undersell how well it did what I asked it to correctly.

They are transformers. They were invented to translate between languages. They can translate and transform any input to any output, based on patterns and a set of guidelines.

The LLM is like an interpreter. The initial prompt is like a program. Judging the interpreter based on the simplistic gen one programs is missing the forest.