davidmurdoch

It told me that "image generation is disabled right now". So I tested in another chat and it was fine. I mentioned that in the broken conversation and it said that "it's only disabled in this chat". I went back to the message before it claimed it was disabled and resent it. It worked. I somewhat miss the days where it would just believe anything you told it, even if I was completely wrong.

If I start a new chat it works.

I'm a Plus subscriber and didn't hit rate limits.

This video gen tool will probably be even more useless.

They had it a few years ago, but the company offering the free integration essentially stopped offering the free part. I'm currently grandfathered in to mail channels.

If a junior is about 50% as useful as a baseline senior, and today, AI's usefulness is only slightly better than the person using it, then 50% * 75% gives you output equal to about 37.5% of a senior. The junior just ships more junior-level output; and in a complex product and complex orgs, this just ends up being a drain on everyone else.

But in the hands of a senior, 100% (senior) * 125% (ai), we get a slightly better senior.

Its not a perfect analogy, and AI is new territory with lots of surprises. AI code reviews, have been separated from the confirmation bias of the driver of the AI, _are_ where I'm seeing the greatest impact on junior engineers. These AI reviews seem to be getting things closer to a level playing field.

But from my news bubble, and my perception of much of Europe... it seems to me that it is very likely a regulation like this would happen in Europe, probably through a well-meaning green initiative.

Funny how perceptions of others can be so drastically different!

But I tend to instinctually (as a mere human) think of a "hallucination" as something more akin to a statement that feels like it could be true, and can't be verified by using only the surrounding context -- like when a human mis-remembers a fact on something they recently read, or extrapolates reasonably, but incorrectly. Example: GPT-5 just told me a few moments ago that webpack's "enhanced-resolve has an internal helper called getPackage.json". Webpack likely does contain logic that finds the package root, but it does not contain a file with this name, and never has. A reasonable person couldn't say with absolutely certainty that enhanced-resolve doesn't contain a file with that name.

I think a "mistake" is classified as more of an error in computation, where all of the facts required to come up with a solution are present in the context of the conversation (simple arithmetic problems, "how many 'r's in strawberry", etc.), but it just does it wrong. I think of mistakes as something with one and only one valid answer. A person with the ability to make the computation themselves can recognize the mistake without further research.

So hallucinations are more about conversational errors, and mistakes are more about computational errors, I guess?

But again, I agree, it gets very difficult to distinguish these things when you dig into them.

This is very dumb. Of course you can.

The sign up form only serves to link saved state to an account so a user could access game history later, there are no gated features. No clue what they could possibly gain from doing this, other than to just get email providers to all mark my domain as spam (which they successfully did).

The site can't make any money, and had only about 1 legit visitor a week, so I just put a cloudflare captcha in front of it and called it a day.

In this case, the software being analyzed is the alternative that sucks.

No user that has reported it has been willing to share their database with us (chrome stores it in a standard leveldb), as it contains private information.

But good to know that about Vivaldi! I didn't know that before, thanks!

I have a similar bug at my job: Sometimes browsers delete our extension's database, or otherwise corrupt it. It's been an issue for years, but no one has been able to reproduce it. It's probably a 1 in 10 million bug.

I think it's a hardware bug. My "fix" was to backup a small, but key, part of the database to a separate storage mechanism browsers let us access. When the issue arises we can now try to detect the missing data and restore part of the db.

BUT! If this is actually a hardware bug, there is a chance that this additional database write will cause this big to occur even more often, as we now have to write to storage twice as often!