Mastodawn

So if you find yourself locked in a 24 hour reply-a-thon with people who repeatedly tell you they didn't consent to something you're doing, and that your understanding of them giving consent is 100% wrong.

Maybe reflect a little on what you're doing?

Just saying. You know. For the record.

Entitas 2d ago

Entitas Jun 22

Ah one last post and I can finally retire [replies and notifications start piling up, i start sweating] but... but my spouse is waiting for me, I can't be dragged back into the life

Entitas Jun 21

I feel like Wikipedia's fundraising/donation begging went from "blurbs during Fundraising Time at specific times of the year" to "they will never stop fucking show up at all hours of all days".

Entitas Jun 20

man who works on his writing skills, reads more, workshops, asks for constructive criticism from others, real path to literary improvement (he wants better prose to impress his LLM roleplay chatbot of Tifa Lockhart being a submissive wife)

Entitas Jun 9

Everyone listen the hell up: this new LLM model we made is SO DANGEROUS it could potentially end human society as we know it.

Anyway, it is currently available on our $20/mo plan in limited usage, but you can also pay-as-you-go with usage credits,

Entitas Jun 8

Since agents are losing their luster as a Thing and people are spooked by costs and bubbles I wonder what the new miniature hype cycle is going to be. Some bullshit that's even dumber than OpenClaw for sure, but what will they cook

Entitas Jun 8

I have been thinking about AI booster reactions to crash/bubble popping speculation, versus all the stupid shit CEOs have said in the name of AI's infinite growth. I think I have narrowed it down to a certain angle: what claims and by who are seen as "predictions that MUST be right lest you lose credibility" and "mere content creation / speculation / hopeful thinking".

It is generally in the CEOs and temporarily embarrassed CEOs favor. They are allowed to say the stupidest shit imaginable and predict AI doing things that are literally impossible for it to do, but these are passed to the boosters as just generating some content.

I don't know. I know what I am thinking but I lack the particular brain juice to make it coherent.

But there is a strange, default assumption on AI's success and infinite growth as the base state of reality, and the burden of proof and credibility stakes seem much stronger against the critics than they are the boosters.

Entitas Jun 5

Actual situation I witnessed with mine eyes just now:

- AI bro shows up in server
- Asks for testers for his AI-assisted tool
- Is gently pointed to the rules about AI
- Can't be him! His tool's different than just posting genAI content.
- Posts anyway. The tool's literally just the thing the server is about, but with AI bolted on.
- Clarifies he's not here to DISCUSS AI. He just uses it. And has a tool using it. And wants people to use the AI tool.
- Literal server owner and creator of thing the server is about arrives, corrects that the rule also includes AI tools.
- Bro says they can delete his message if it's not wanted (because he's not respectful enough to delete it himself I guess)

Why are these fucks so confident?

Show thread

Entitas Jun 4

Addendum: "Also while we make ourselves unaccountable for anything, we'd really like you to pay us."