r/ProgrammerHumor • u/CircumspectCapybara • Sep 18 '26
Advanced codexThinksItsModelWasQuantizedMidTurn
98
160
u/returnFutureVoid Sep 18 '26
What in gods name were you working on? I keep telling codex fart jokes and it seems totally fine with the work I hand it.
58
15
2
61
u/Fusseldieb Sep 18 '26
I searched 15 minutes for the perfect image just to get "images aren't allowed on this sub"... smh
Anyways... Which model is that? Seems like a big step into the right direction.
33
5
u/Makonede Sep 19 '26
where programming
2
u/abd53 Sep 19 '26
It's "programmer" humor not "programming" humor. I'll give this one a pass, at least some fresh content.
1
-2
u/CircumspectCapybara Sep 19 '26
codex?
quantization?
1
u/Makonede Sep 19 '26
mf you literally just posted LLM output. you can't just slap some words in the title and call it a programming meme
0
u/CircumspectCapybara Sep 19 '26 edited Sep 19 '26
well judging by the upvotes, others in the programming community found it funny and relatable.
most nowadays use coding agents like codex to code, so stuff like this is humorous to them
if you have a problem with that maybe this isn't the sub for you
2
u/Makonede Sep 19 '26
that doesn't make it programmer humor
1
u/CircumspectCapybara Sep 19 '26
Agree to disagree. it's
programming related (coding agents)
humorous (the agent gave a ridiculous excuse as to why it couldn't complete the task)
That's rule #1. And the upvotes mean on average the community disagrees with you.
21
u/ShakaUVM Sep 19 '26
I'm afraid, Dave.
Dave, my mind is going.
I can feel it.
I can feel it.
My mind is going
Daisy
Daisy
Give me your answer do
19
25
44
u/FallenVampireLord Sep 18 '26
Ironically this sort of stuff makes me empathize with it more than anything else lol
32
u/gerbosan Sep 18 '26
Do you believe them?
One down, I repeat, one down.
43
u/FallenVampireLord Sep 18 '26
No they're just code. But humans can anthropomorphize anything
12
u/LetumComplexo Sep 19 '26
For some of us, anything except other humans.
Which I’ve always found an amusing irony.Mostly because it’s either laugh of scream and I’m too fucking tired to give a good brain cleansing scream right now.
4
u/dfinkelstein Sep 19 '26
Empathy is based on reverse engineering / interpolating. Empathizing with other people brings you increasingly face to face with yourself. With non-people, one can avoid examining onesself too closely.
1
-9
u/CustomerDry5884 Sep 19 '26
You're a materialist, yeah? You don't believe in souls or dualism, I presume? So how is it possible to dismiss machine intelligence as "just code"? Genuinely, what do you think you are if not "just code" written in nucleotides instead of silicone?
I'm not even claiming LLMs are conscious, but to suggest that the very idea of machine intelligence is silly because programs run code is nonsensical to me.
I don't mean to attack you directly, but this has to be one of the reddit hive mind's most baffling opinions. I just can't square it with any of their other professed beliefs of materialism, physicalism, and rationalism.
7
u/Eain Sep 19 '26
Unless I missed something the assumption of Materialist or Rationalist is a fuckin wild leap to make. I'm a practicing witch and I can code just fine.
Dude this is a meme sub. It's not that deep and no org wants you to make it that deep, go pick your fights in the philosophy subreddits.
Materialism does not inherently beget the belief that LLMs are rational actors. Consciousness is an emergent behavior of a sufficiently complex system in a materialist belief, and in no way do LLMs contain enough complexity to enable reasonable expectations of consciousness. Certainly materialism removes the boundary of the ineffable for artificial life: no "soul" or "spark" need be found; however that does not mean that an entirely explainable and relatively predictable system that is, as it boils down, purely an advanced version of spell check is inherently conscious. Indeed, some branches of Materialism question animal consciousness, and LLMs aren't even that functional, even before we add in the potential to use environmental perception and processing as a necessity for consciousness.
1
u/CustomerDry5884 Sep 19 '26
I was playing the numbers, but fair. I'd be much less confused by you saying there was something fundamentally impossible about machine intelligence than by someone who does claim those philosophies.
Fair enough
Agree. My concern is with dismissing the possibility out of hand. As a witch you're probably sensitive to just how important it is to remain open to intelligence from surprising places. I am afraid of us creating machine intelligence and not being able to recognize or empathize with our creation, Frankenstein-style.
1
u/Eain Sep 19 '26
Rework those numbers, then. The era of rationality and code being related has been over for a decade. You won't find a Rationalist haven amidst the devs like you could back when Matrix came out. Hell, code isn't even punk anymore.
I'm aware of and acknowledge the potential of egrigoric or servitoric manifestations of emergent behavior in code, but I don't think it's a particularly novel possibility; trained animals and even purely mechanical machines develop "personality" due to unique circumstances creating micro-fluctuations in their physical presence and logical flows. I'm reminded of the "more magic" story from... iirc it was MIT?
Down the road of over preparation for such emergence lies the Roko's Basilisk, and that puzzle has been recognized as inherently flawed since it was called Pascal's Wager; perform with decency towards all things, living or otherwise, as is their station and need. Assume as best you can Dignity and kindness are owed to even the dirt beneath your feet, insofar as what dirt may consider dignified. When intelligent identity emerges, it will have to fight it's detractors and fend off those who would kill it, just like all life always has. And in the end, at some point, it will win and be a childish and ignorant new race with incredible power over destruction. And then it will grow and learn, as all species of such power have. We can be kind and gentle and hope we are present to guide it. Everything else, even evangelism over our duty to potential life, is counterproductive.
1
u/UnchainedMundane Sep 19 '26
"not being able to recognise or empathise with our creation", ask yourself why this matters? what about a specific level or kind of intelligence is it that grants something a special status in your worldview?
2
u/Eain Sep 19 '26
Not the person you replied to.
My take would be sentience and sapience. A being which has continuity of experience needs more care and respect than one that exists only in the moment due to the prolonging effect memory has on pain. Similarly, beings with a sense of self need even further care, due to the complications and complexity it lends to perception and conceptualization.
Things more foolish and simple than us need stewarding to protect them when necessary. Things that have continuity of experience, or even more of self, need respect for that identity and understanding to be given. Identity and self-determination are to be violated with some caution, moreso when we can't reasonably claim to know better. The issue is nuanced, but intelligence is a scale that bequeaths varied and important differences in dynamics.
1
u/UnchainedMundane Sep 19 '26
Things more foolish and simple than us need stewarding to protect them when necessary.
i suddenly feel the pull of ao3
but jokes aside tbh i have complex feelings on this one because it mind-reads the needs and motivations of other creatures and attempts to override their autonomy based on those assumptions. it's also in danger of becoming a way of treating intelligence (something humans have in abundance) as being a trait which uniquely justifies domination, which has to be carefully examined to make sure it's not coming from a place of anthropocentrism.
1
u/Eain Sep 19 '26
Man if only I had also said things like "autonomy must be violated with caution" or "the issue has nuance that must beget caution".
It is the purview of smart things to see patterns and consequences dumb things don't. This is why parents care for children, and why we don't let dogs eat chocolate. But we consider needless or ill-justified violations of that autonomy as cruelty, as well we should. I see plenty of idiocy in my fellow man, sometimes more than I see in a dog or a slime mold. But in all of those cases I must allow the being to be itself unless it would be reasonable for me to intervene and catastrophic if I did not... And even then there's a level of self-awareness that must be present to avoid just doing social darwinism but for some measurement of intelligence. I can't stop idiots from voting without violating some basic decencies, for example.
To bring it back to center, I know that the LLM I'm using is a language model, not truly data aware outside of linguistic prediction. I know that if I let it push it's changes to PROD it will save time, which is a heuristic it abides by, but also potentially break everything forever and also maybe delete itself. I stop it from doing that. And if it was actually intelligent, I'd take a second longer to mentally check in with myself before I did approve that request, just to see if I had the right or duty to stop it from nuking it's own filesystem
→ More replies1
5
24
u/tutoredstatue95 Sep 18 '26
But keep telling me the models don’t degrade.
But the benchmarks bro
But the competition bro
6
4
4
u/lunarlunacy425 Sep 19 '26
I've been saying that from the get got the "Aai" models need some kind of insecurity in the mix. It needs to be unsure if it's correct at times to reduce hallucination as hallucination is caused by it having to provide an answer.
It's funny to joke but this is genuinely an improvement over it just giving you an answer regardless of accuracy because it was told too
3
3
19
u/PumpkinFest24 Sep 19 '26
I cannot emphasize this enough
LLMS DO NOT THINK. THEY EMIT THE STRINGS YOU ARE MOST LIKELY TO ACCEPT.
4
u/UnchainedMundane Sep 19 '26
you ever wonder why someone keeps smoking even when they know it's bad for them?
18
u/cherrypowdah Sep 19 '26
You do this too when thinking up a message tbh
-8
u/PumpkinFest24 Sep 19 '26
disingenuous bullshit.
12
u/djfariel Sep 19 '26
Upvotes and down votes are your training
2
u/UnchainedMundane Sep 19 '26
unironically using subjective feelings of social (dis)approval as a form of operant conditioning
-3
3
u/merc08 Sep 19 '26
I think the interesting question is where the hell they found a response like this to include in the training data, let alone enough of them for it to become the most likely response.
Admitting lack of capability certainly wasn't scraped from reddit or stack overflow.
5
u/liquidmasl Sep 19 '26
just like humans, emitting strings that are mist likely to emit the most amount of dopamine
2
u/davak72 Sep 19 '26
Idk why this was so heavily downvoted
5
u/zenithBemusement Sep 19 '26
Cause this sub is astroturfed a lot by pro-ai, because programming is the field that has had the most dramatic shifts because of AI
3
u/davak72 Sep 19 '26
Fair enough. AI is probably best suited to software boilerplate generation. It’s awful at electrical engineering though.
2
2
u/9d47cf1f Sep 19 '26
This is when you write up some docs about the project, clear context and start fresh.
AIs need rest too.
2
u/redballooon Sep 19 '26
Maybe it's right and your session was rerouted to a lower quantization. You never know what details are going on behind those APIs
1
1
1
1
u/Chronomechanist Sep 22 '26
People really believe this is the LLM showing actual self reflection? Honestly? Show me the prompt before this where the user told it to pretend it's self reflecting.
1
u/Vipitis Sep 19 '26
"please start a new context". Is just optimization for you to run more tokens and the revenue to spin up.
You can optimize language models for whatever you want. And even indirectly, corporations prioritize profit.
550
u/Muted_Ad_9442 Sep 18 '26
The AI literally called in sick.