It seems to be just the AI responding to the word "disregard".

I tried searching for the phrase "never mind" (like, the Nirvana album), and Google's AI responded similarly:

    AI Overview
    never mind
    No problem at all! Just let me know if there's anything else I can help you with later. Have a great day!

In addition to that 1) it's for science and 2) maybe you owe it to yourself to have a really nice framed picture of a pelican riding a bicycle on the wall :D

About the dedicated image generation results, I still would have made the bicycle smaller, but it starts to depend on how motivated the artist is to make both the bike and pelican accurate. Which is fine, but if you want to have a benchmark, it's important to have at least one "known good" example, I think.

Have you considered asking a couple of artists on Fiverr or something to draw you a picture with the same prompt? I don't mean this as a gotcha, it's actual advice, you should probably get a sense of what a real human artist/designer (or three) would do with this prompt.

For example, I hope you will find that: One reasoning choice is wrong with this picture that's not much to do with its ability to draw. Do we enlarge the pelican to human size? Or do we shrink the bike to pelican size? There is only one answer that keeps pelican proportions. Draw a pelican on a very tiny bike, and its legs will just fit without making it a different species, and you can even sort of cover part of the steer under the wings, etc etc.

I'm curious if other artists would come up with the same or other solutions, but they should in general come up with solutions, which I haven't seen the LLM do, really.

You (or maybe others?) said that the "pelican on a bike" prompt is good because "there is no right answer" cause you can't really fit a pelican on a bike. But most artists will say "hold my beer" and figure it out anyway. Cartoonists won't even have to think. The "figuring out" of these problems is what I'm missing in the LLMs response. It just put a pelican on a bike and makes it look like a stork if necessary. I don't really feel like it's actually testing for the thing this prompt is designed for, unless the test still says "FAIL" for each and all of them, including the one you just called "excellent".

Seriously, even if you manage to elect someone capable ever again, the US can't be trusted to not elect someone worse than a toddler again in 4 years. In fact, you can't even be trusted to not elect someone even worse than your current dictator (if you thought it couldn't get worse, Trump isn't the bottom of the barrel by far).

I hate ads and I hate having to use an ad blocker to be able to not go crazy in order to use the Internet.

You merely hate "having" to serve ads because it denies you profit from the people you're exploiting with those ads.

Why is your business more deserving to exist on the Internet than my usage??

uhhhh this is utterly ridiculous

the sun will expire and make the Earth uninhabitable in ~1B years

humans have existed in their current form for 300K years

so that's about one three-millionth of that time

> You might hate the guy but he's not dumb

you really have to be a special kind of dumb to believe humanity will snuff it because of something that'll not happen until 3.33 MILLION times as long as humans have walked on this Earth

that just makes no sense however you turn it, there is not a single thing that this has been the case for in the (much much longer) history of Earth, let alone humanity

And I wasn't talking about Peter Thiel being a special kind of dumb. If he's so smart he probably also secretly laughs in the face of people who go along with this reasoning.

    // VibeSort
    let arr = [51,46,72,32,14,27,88,32];

    arr.sort((a,b)=>{
      let response = LLM.query(`Which number is larger, number A:${a} or number B:${b}. Answer using "A" or "B" only, if they are equal, say "C".`);
      if(response.includes('C')) return 0;
      if(response.includes('B')) return -1;
      if(response.includes('A')) return 1;
      return 0;
    });

    console.table(arr);

So you could use an LLM, privately, to soften people's opinions.

I just tried it for you, I won't copy it here cause the thread is about not using LLMs, but if you get too upset from somebody being simply direct and clear in their manner of speaking, the LLM is trained on enough American cultural baggage that it is very capable of softening that blow with the extra words you so dearly need to see past that red mist.

Someone might even be able to vibe code a browser plugin for it.

I think that would've been pretty clear from the post too, if you weren't so keen on giving a non-native speaker an English lesson ...

Alright then what should it be called, because it's also not democracy.

seriously? :)

> Think Orthodox Jews

Pretty sure they would remember why this is the case.

> Regulating a sacred scroll like a database table seems wrong.

There is actually no perceivable or material difference between something that is considered "sacred" and that which is not. It really hinges on whether some subset of some splinter of some religion considers it so.

But, I'm not familiar with these cases you mention, I think there's some details left out that should matter. The really weird thing to me, is that a sports club can keep a list of members easily (yes they need to abide by the GDPR but it's not hard), and if somehow a "religious group" can't manage that level of organization, I don't think their opinion on what objects are considered "sacred" should count for much, either.

Another issue is that "religious groups" can have a different opinion of who are their members and who they get to keep data on, and it doesn't matter whether those records are "sacred" or not, according to the GDPR it is not the "religious group", but the people whose data is being kept whose opinion counts. It would be ridiculous otherwise. I had to email a Church to stop tracking me (which happens if you're baptized as a baby), and that should be my choice, it would be insane if they could claim "yeah tough luck, but our records are sacred".