> I thought it was vaguely common for secretaries (or staffers) to run the email/social media accounts of politicians and executives?
Yes, that's correct. One of the many functions of an executive assistant for a senior executive is to manage the email inbox and the calendar. But even there, there are rules, even if they aren't technically enforced by Google Workspace or MS Exchange. Each principal has a slightly different set of rules with their EAs, and you could imagine similar differentiation with how people customize their own AI agents to get the best balance of keeping your inbox clean vs. not causing your email to turn into a weapon against you.
When a human assistant or advisor is on the receiving end of this delegation, there's typically plenty of risk for them if they do something untoward. I am talking financial, reputational, legal, career risks.
When an AI agent screws up on some highly consequential manner, ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yeah, their "corporate mascots" are valuable IP because they are associated with fun games. The games aren't fun because of the mascots, it's the other way around.
> It's fine for citizens to voice positions, beliefs etc. It's not fine for organizations of hostile origins to astro-sturf and manipulate people into positions they wouldn't normally take.
As the Supreme Court has already apted noted, organizations enjoy free speech rights in the U.S. as well, including the right to advocate for positions you or others wouldn't normally take.
Yes, and I said 'of hostile origin' - the law still prohibits foreign nationals and foreign organizations spending in US elections. I want to know if they are at work here, and the reason why our media does not represent the people (who overwhelmingly voted for Trump).
When people learn to do things by reacting to inputs, they learn much better when the input comes soon after the action/inaction they are trying to train, rather than long after. When you can tie specific acts as a driver to a later financial penalty it helps you learn to avoid the specific acts, otherwise you'd stuck having to figure out in three weeks when the bill comes around what you were doing on the date the insurance statement flagged as a hard stop.
> Having established that, are you saying that you can't even conceptualize a conflict of interest potentially clouding someone's judgement any more if the amount of money and the person's perceived status and skill level all get increased.
If I used AI to make a Super Nintendo soundtrack, no one would treat it as equivalent to Nobuo Uematsu or Koji Kondo or Dave Wise using AI to do the same and making the claim that the AI was managing to make creatively impressive work. Even if those famous composers worked for Anthropic.
Yes there would be relevant biases but there could not be a comparison of my using AI to make music slop vs. their expert supervision of AI to make something much more impressive.
Just because AI is involved in two different things doesn't make them similar things.
This is a great website for learning this type of puzzle. Certainly better than what people had available to them before.
Once you have learned and want to keep playing, this site has tens of thousands of good nonograms, in both black-and-white and color: https://www.nonograms.org/
There are also "Picross" games for Nintendo consoles (and recently Squeakross for Steam).
I had the equivalent of --dry-run in my kdecvs-build script from 2003 (where it was called --pretend) so it's not that spontaneous an idea that it must have been dreamed up by an AI.
Any time you have a script that needs to run for a long time or might involve destructive actions, having a way to run the script in a "tell me what you would do without actually doing it" mode is a fairly obvious user story to throw in.
Again, it's completely possible that OP and you are the wonderful exceptions (untouched and uninspired by coding agents) that have been using these patterns for as long as you can remember. My comment revolved around the psychological phenomenon, not whether dry-run is a clever/novel idea. It's about how we might tell ourselves stories about the origin of our ideas when working with those tools.
And my point is simply that if it were obvious enough an idea that I thought of it after initially using my tool, you probably will want to look for more realistic examples of where a person thinks they came up with an idea that was really prompted back to them in an AI chat.
This isn't something with surprising nuance like how a McDonald's milkshake serves a non-food "job to be done" during a shopper's morning commute. As evidenced by all the others in this thread pointing out other tools that do similar things, it's a fairly obvious idea to come up with after actually using a new tool.
You'd be more likely to learn about it doing product comparisons of other tools, although since there is a lot of common art for AI training to draw from, yes it is also possible to hear about it from your AI first.
Yeah I don't even agree with the conceit that public investment is causing companies to make bad games. You don't make 'good returns' as a video game company with bad video games, I don't care how fancy your financial engineering is. And private investors care about returns just as much as public investors do.
If anything a lot of this is on gamers for continuing to buy shitty games that they complained even at the time were shitty games.
If they'd stopped buying games the lousy companies would have folded, their investors would have eaten a loss, and the game companies that remained would care more about the investors who'd shown more of a long-term focus.
Yes, that's correct. One of the many functions of an executive assistant for a senior executive is to manage the email inbox and the calendar. But even there, there are rules, even if they aren't technically enforced by Google Workspace or MS Exchange. Each principal has a slightly different set of rules with their EAs, and you could imagine similar differentiation with how people customize their own AI agents to get the best balance of keeping your inbox clean vs. not causing your email to turn into a weapon against you.
reply