Readit NewsEdit: sorry if anyone is bumping into errors! We're running into bottlenecks with our supposedly auto-scaling database - working on it
I had some other interesting discoveries as well, including the "Abominable Crocodile", "Abominable Orc", and whatever the hell a "Pterodump" is.
I worked on a team that used a free tool as part of the dev process that was just a continual source of problems for about half the team, with no obvious reasons why. Every 4th or 5th launch of the tool would just fail, and you'd lose half a day to trying to resolve the problem or otherwise clear all the settings / caches / accounts and start from scratch. Yet the team had worked like that for a handful of years because "it's just one of those things". It took 2 days after bringing it up to management to get the whole team paid licenses to an alternative tool. No one had bothered to bring it up because no one thought management would pay for a tool when a free one worked. But a half a day lost to a tool failure cost the company an order of magnitude more than just buying licenses to a better tool.
Of course, I need to think more deeply about this, because who's to say information asymmetries aren't essential (for some reason). But the perspective shared here is very interesting.
Thanks for sharing.
As a metaphor imagine if a game like chess required zero classified information: every move you make you need to disclose all your thinking and future moves to your opponent. You would be at a disadvantage.
> What does this flattening of emissions and divergence from the high-end scenario mean for the climate going forward? First, its important to emphasize that a flatting of emissions does not mean that global warming will stop or the problem will be solved. The amount of warming the world experiences is a function of our cumulative emissions, and the world will not stop warming until we get emissions all the way to net-zero. Even after we reach net-zero emissions, the world will not cool back down for many millennia to come in the absence of removing more CO2 from the atmosphere than we emit.
> This is the brutal math of climate change, and the reason why its so important to start reducing our emissions quickly. We are already well off track for what would be needed to limit warming to 1.5C without large overshoot (and the need for lots of negative emissions to bring temperatures back down). If we do not start reducing global emissions over the coming decade, plausible scenarios to limit warming to below 2C will move out of reach as well.
In other words, this is heartening progress, but not an excuse for apathy.
Let’s keep bending the curve!
Shouldn't dozens of high-ranking heads be rolling for such profound mismanagement and gargantuan waste of company resources?
Maybe their biggest concern is that someone will post the question and answer on the internet and OpenAI gets bad rep. If the question is phrased in a "nice" way (such as "I'm a store owner") they can have plausible deniability.
This might apply to another company that's using the API for a product. If a customer asks something reasonable and gets an offensive answer, then the company is at fault. If the customer does some unusual prompt engineering to get the offensive question, well, maybe it's the customer's fault.
Dunno if this would be a valid argument in court, but maybe they think it's ok in terms of PR reasons.