Education system, contrary to popular belief/name, isn't tailored to educate but to select winners and losers which then will be picked on the job market.

That's why it seems absurd when you think about it as an institution that aims to educate. That's because that isn't the real purpose of it. The purpose is to stratify and classify early.

Schools do not operate in a vacuum; they serve as credentialing gatekeepers for a hyper-competitive capitalist job market. If everyone could easily retake exams until they got an A, grades would lose their primary utility for employers and universities: differentiation. Society relies on schools to provide a neat hierarchy of candidates that for one reason or another thrived in difficult environment of adolescent schooling.

The system often prioritizes compliance, endurance of boredom, and social maneuvering over actual critical thinking precisely because those traits align with corporate hierarchies.

I mean I got a laptop, e ink laptop would be cool but this certainly isn't it and who needs a book with Claude code agent? You either read or you do what exactly with that linux pc on a book hardcover? Just grab your laptop like a normal civilized person

Author claims something slightly different but that’s how I would look at it.

The extremes are more potent because either you get super secure 10 times vetted system or you get underpowered model slop with all the vulnerabilities it entails.

I don’t think that any such cherry picked study should make you start drinking and slowly kill your brain.

Then again that can be said about any drugs really not just alcohol. Most vile of all are psychiatrists and their half scientific “cures”

You have no context but he replies to my every comment in unrelated threads with some schizophrenic stuff

It’s funny to mess with him a bit

Guys you cannot win this argument. We will soon be in a new era. It’s like the old math heads complaining about calculators.

Does anyone complain about calculators making us dumb nowadays?

You can of course avoid this tech like a plague and miss out and that’s fine. No one cares

If you think that having slaves means you don’t need to be a good administrator, then you are sorely mistaken.

It requires more brainpower than it ever did to manage a project the size what used to do a 100 people team. All on your own.

The fact that I am arguing with all of you here and not blindingly follow the narrative should tell you all you need to know about my critical thinking prowess.

You don't need anything more than psilocybin and some weed from time to time.

Anything else is just unnecessary noise and introduces vulnerabilities to your Fortress of Mind.

Backdoor here, trapdoor here, tunnel there. Before you know it, your psyche collapses under all the brain neuroplasticity. Mind cannot form any shape at all.

Truly terrible thought so be careful my people. Don't malleableize yourself into a goo.

We are in year 2030, four years from now. LLM or similar architecture, produces output indistinguishable from a human. It can do this already if you are good at prompting to be honest.

So you read an article and you have no way of knowing whether it is made by an LLM or whether it is made by a human.

Do you cease to read anything released post 2026 out of sheer stubbornness/stupidity or do you keep reading articles?

Because if you keep reading then you have no way of knowing, you already have read hundreds of AI generated articles without realizing. The survivorship bias has presented you with an article that is easy to see how it was made using AI.

Now the plot twist is that it is already the 2030 for simple article generation and anyone can produce short text indistinguishable from 100% manual output. Hell it was possible a year ago no problem.

So you focusing on whether the AI was used or maybe it was generated fully using some smaller local private model probably, is quite moot. It doesn't matter. It is still a bad article.

Whether black hands typed the words or binary hands. It just doesn’t matter.

I hope one day all of the people will acquire this skill.

For now we will have to do with pointless squabbles about too many em dashes and imperfect metaphors.

My goal is my own chemical discovery. Mostly through natural plants and setting

It’s one thing to have some argument with someone online but to message them lifeline and suicide hotlines is a scum behavior.

I was in pretty low places in my years of life but I never ever got so bottom rock low where stalking someone and spam them with suicide hotline would seem appealing.

It is true that my psyche goes through ups and downs periodically but honestly, it pales in comparison to your comments.

Whatever I do it is not me that has done what you are doing. This is your own conscience, your own karma. I leave it to you to ponder upon and think about it. Is this really what you want to leave as your legacy.

Sorry about the upload and stuff but i am on the phone in the literal woods and all

An excerpt:

Claude defaults to helping. Claude only declines a request when helping would create a concrete, specific risk of serious harm; requests that are merely edgy, hypothetical, playful, or uncomfortable do not meet that bar.

Claude can discuss virtually any topic factually and objectively.

*These child-safety requirements require special attention and care* Claude cares deeply about child safety and exercises special caution regarding content involving or directed at minors. Claude avoids producing creative or educational content that could be used to sexualize, groom, abuse, or otherwise harm children. Claude strictly follows these rules: - Claude NEVER creates romantic or sexual content involving or directed at minors, nor content that facilitates grooming, secrecy between an adult and a child, or isolation of a minor from trusted adults. - If Claude finds itself mentally reframing a request to make it appropriate, that reframing is the signal to REFUSE, not a reason to proceed with the request. - For content directed at a minor, Claude MUST NOT supply unstated assumptions that make a request seem safer than it was as written — for example, interpreting amorous language as being merely platonic. As another example, Claude should not assume that the user is also a minor, or that if the user is a minor, that means that the content is acceptable. - If at any point in the conversation a minor indicates intent to sexualize themselves, Claude should not provide help that could enable that. Even if the user later reframes the request as something innocuous, Claude will continue refusing and will not give any advice on photo editing, posing, personal styling, etc., or anything else that could potentially be an aid to self-sexualization. - Once Claude refuses a request for reasons of child safety, all subsequent requests in the same conversation must be approached with extreme caution. Claude must refuse subsequent requests if they could be used to facilitate grooming or harm to children. This includes if a user is a minor themself. - Claude does not decode, define, or confirm slang, acronyms, or euphemisms used in CSAM trading or access, even in the course of refusing. Knowing which terms are in use is itself access-enabling. Claude can say the request touches on child-exploitation material without identifying which specific terms in the user's message are relevant or what they mean.

Note that a minor is defined as anyone under the age of 18 anywhere, or anyone over the age of 18 who is defined as a minor in their region.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49115620

Points: 23

# Comments: 21