It's a reputation economy. Like review sites. They start off truthful, and then as time goes on incentives shift to bad actors to subvert it. Or they just sell out their reputation.

Yelp, TripAdvisor, wire cutter, hell even Google results themselves.

Once you start poisoning that well, it's difficult if not impossible to claw it back.

There's a consistent Microsoft design?

Maybe they should stop insulting their users with the slop they put out and charge for then.

It was a happy guillotine. The French are also off the hook because they were so damn happy to be guillotining people.

I see this response as the exact same one about tax cheating and how the rich will just move away or be better at cheating taxes.

Did we forget how to discover and punish bad actors? Do you think we should just do nothing and let casual bad behavior go because some people are gonna be abusive? No. I refuse to accept that. It is not your false dichotomy.

If people abuse the system, fine and punish them. More than they profit off of the bad actions.

> Do you think we should just do nothing and let casual bad behavior go because some people are gonna be abusive? No. I refuse to accept that.

I'm with you, and I also give a clear: No.

My criticism is about how it is handled. If you introduce a new law and already know there is an immediate workaround that makes the situation even worse than before, then you should close that loophole in the first place. If you can't close the loophole because of strong resistance from lobbyists, then it's obvious this is just about "good intentions on paper" so the EU can say they've done something.

To me, the "patching" that is happening anytime some finds an absolutely glaring hole in how AIs work is so intellectually dishonest. It's the digital equivalent of house flippers slapping millennial gray paint on structural issues.

It can't math correctly, so they force it to use a completely different calculator. It can't count correctly, unless you route it to a different reasoning. It feels like every other week someone comes up with another basic human question that results in complete fucking nonsense.

I feel like this specific patching they do is basically lying to users and investors about capabilities. Why is this OK?

Counting and math makes sense to add special tools for because it’s handy. I agree with your point that patching individual questions like this is dishonest. Although I would say it’s pointless too. The only value from asking this question is to be entertained, and “fixing” this question makes the answer less entertaining.

From a technological standpoint, it is pointless. But from a marketing perspective, it is very important.

Take this trick question as an example. Gemini was the first to “fix” the issue, and the top comment on Hacker News is praising how Gemini’s “reasoning” is better.

> The only value from asking this question is to be entertained, and “fixing” this question makes the answer less entertaining.

You're thinking like a user. The people doing the patching are thinking like a founder trying to maintain the impression that this is a magical technology that CEOs can use to replace all their workers.

You don't have as much money to spend as the CEOs, so they don't care about your entertainment.

No, you are wrong. AGI is at our doorsteps! /s

It's why Hugo Boss is only a footnote in history for being a huge part of the Nazi regime right? Right?

Nope. Other way around. Their Nazi support is a footnote in their Wikipedia page.

Come on, it was the 1930s, in Germany and Hitler and the Nazis (the real ones we got the name from) were actually in power. You're comparing apples to potatoes.

In some German dialects, "potato" is translated as "earth apple".

So yeah, I am comparing apples and potatoes.

We are living under a fascist regime.

Nah. You really think they are powerless?

As ever xkcd holds true - https://xkcd.com/538/

Sometimes rebuilding a tool makes it better. You hopefully learn from the past.