Did you think 5 years into the invention of electricity the world already was vastly different? The internet? Would you have written them off because random people didn't know much about them at that point - which isnt even true as chatgpt has been ~ the 5th most popular site in the world for a couple of years now?

> which isnt even true as chatgpt has been ~ the 5th most popular site in the world for a couple of years now?

That part is kind of their point - it doesn't have the distribution issues your other examples have.

You think machine learning has only been around for 5 years? It has been around for 76 years, since 1950. The first pattern matching chatbot was Eliza, created in 1966. Shannon-style next-word statistical model chatbots were created in the 1980s. The first neural models were created 26 years ago. Large language models have been around for 10 years.

This technology is not new and has been around since well before the internet.

I mean, besides the fact that electricity and the internet are orders of magnitude more transformative than a statistical next-token prediction machine, none of the predictions behind LLMs were made of either in the first 5 years.

Gangnam Style is the most popular video ever, surely it means something right?!

If we're cooked, it's only because of a mass hysteria behind this thing. It's an extremely useful technology, we're just losing our collective mind because of it.

100% correct, but the last thing a person suffering from delusions wants to hear is that they’re suffering from delusions. LLMs inadvertently hack some very primal parts of the human brain, and specifically the part that anthropomorphizes things with seemingly human-like behavior. Combine that with herd behavior caused by social media and you have a perfect mass delusion machine. It’s nearly impossible for people inside the delusion to see their way out.

This is going to be studied for many, many generations to come.

I've barely changed my mind on it. It was obviously premature at the time, but the right attitude because it's hard to tell which model is too dangerous in advance. If anything, I wish this rigor had evolved with the next releases but alas we no longer have the OpenAI of 2019.

>they’ll sometimes catch harmless requests, though they trigger, on average, in less than 5% of sessions.

Isn't (less than) 5% of sessions a lot? I was expecting a sub1% guarantee there, so this surprised me already.

Claude Code has been wonderful for work and the frequent improvements are nice, although with Mythos being used by others ages ago and new versions for the public still being bellow that, it's hard to not feel like the underclass already.

It's also at minimum baked into the system prompt of virtually any LLM.

That's not "baked" and only applies to remotely hosted LLMs where someone else feeds the prompt into the LLM.

Compared to gemini-cli which I was using the last few weeks it also doesn't:

1. Doesn't tell you your weekly qutoa (at least on Pro plan/all the time)

2. Your agent cant access the quota to not run some tasks at low quota

3. You cant see the context size

4. Your agent can't see the context size

5. You can't compact/compress

6. You have to keep starting new chats which also kill any processes it has running (e.g. a telegram listener)

7. Doesn't have a straightforward linux/wsl install (I ended up using the Windows IDE and pointing it to wsl).

And that's from just migrating a gemini-cli model and trying to set it up for an hour. Incredible downgrade for no reason.

No compacting?????????

Nope, it does some automatically, but you cant even check the context size let alone compact. The agent proposes to start a new chat when you think it might be high, and that's it.

It does auto compact

It depends heavily on what type of data though. As far as I understand if you have no PII or anything close to it you are mostly safe - especially if it's customer data but aggregated.

> We did get a certificate though.

As someone who never bothered to get any certificates (beyond a University degree) even when I'd do online courses (of which the most course-like must've been fast.ai), are these ever actually useful in any manner?

There are so many stupid "courses" and SaaS tools doing this I imagine that the value of the many of these certificates is close to 0.

Many of them you can simply take the exam over and over until you pass, and then stick a shiny stupid badge on your LinkedIn profile.

They are useful for getting a job, that’s about it.

In our case, we get our entire team AWS solution architect certs as well just so we can always tell our customers that our whole team is certified (we do a lot of “forward deployed” stuff for enterprise customers).

In his case of a large company, I’d expect that completing the useless training is necessary to get access to the tool. That’s how it worked in mine.

As someone working in a small business/startup, who finally got the team Claude Team Premium, I don't really get what might I benefit extra from by enabling this. I can find whatever workflows and tell it to integrate them anyway, why would I bother with this?

They dont know :)

A lot of people had this idea. You’re going to have to take a vague idea to fruition if you want the props you’re looking for.

Can you point me to them? I couldn't find anyone writing a version of that idea back then, I'd be curious to read how others framed it.