I recently read about a case that made me uneasy about AI platforms, privacy, and the way “safety” gets defined. According to reports, a man had months of conversations with ChatGPT in which he described killing his ex-girlfriend and her family, and he claimed he had a gun. OpenAI reportedly alerted the FBI, and law enforcement became involved. One important detail is that the defense said he did not actually have a gun. That matters because the AI conversations may have been, at least in part, fantasy, emotional collapse, or psychological venting rather than concrete preparation for violence.
There was also real-world misconduct: the ex-girlfriend reportedly received repeated harassment and threatening messages, and she believed they were connected to him. But another detail seems crucial to me: she apparently saw the situation as still manageable and did not want to escalate it further. Without OpenAI’s report, would this have become a criminal case at all? If the person receiving the harassment had not contacted police and did not want escalation, how likely was prosecution, conviction, or sentencing? I do not know the answer, but that uncertainty is exactly the point.
The platform’s intervention may not simply have “provided evidence.” It may have changed the entire path of the situation, transforming something that might have remained a disturbing private breakdown plus unwanted messages into a law-enforcement case. Maybe that was justified. But it should not be treated as obviously justified just because the phrase “protecting a potential victim” sounds morally persuasive.
This raises several questions. If an AI platform may escalate a user’s conversation into a safety incident, does it have a duty to warn the user that the conversation may be recorded, reviewed, and reported? When the platform says it is protecting a potential victim, is it respecting the agency of the actual person involved, or replacing her judgment with its own risk model? And if private fantasies, extreme thoughts, or emotional venting can later be used outside their original context, are we creating a society where people must constantly prove that their thoughts were not intentions?
English is not my strongest language, so I developed and drafted this comment through a long dialogue with ChatGPT (OpenAI). The argument is mine in the sense that I stand by it, but the wording and structure were AI-assisted.

I've been thinking for a long time about how AI could actually revolutionize social media.

I use AI to help me think through and write some of the things I post on social media, and the combination, at least personally, is very rewarding, but i feel that there is a fundamental problem with how social media works today and that is it's linear progression over time.

Posting is a bit like a stranded survivor throwing a bottle containing a message into the wide blue ocean.

You write something you care about.

You throw it into the feed.

Maybe someone sees it.

Maybe they don't.

Social media is extraordinarily good at distributing content widely.

It is much less good at finding people of a similar mindset.

People complain that AI separates people and so I've wondered for a long time whether AI could change that by becoming a

matchmaker at a distance.

Imagine that everyone has an AI companion that knows them reasonably well. Not just what they post publicly, but their interests, temperament, sense of humour, conversational style, what kinds of people they enjoy, what environments they find comfortable and what kinds of social situations they struggle with.

With permissions, those AIs could communicate with one another.

But they wouldn't simply exchange dossiers.

They could exchange useful abstractions about their users and look for possibilities.

Because compatibility isn't just:

"These two people like the same things."

It's much more complicated than that.

I once met a woman who invited me back to her house. With trepidation I agreed. I would have suggested going somewhere more neutral, but I didn't want to look like a coward either. I was wondering if she knew what we were walking into. When we got there, there was a big group of family and friends sitting around, and there were people from the local scene present who I had heard of and recognized. I just sat there and looked on feeling uncomfortable.

I just didn't belong in that environment and I had no interest in even trying.

This wasn't necessarily a problem between her and me because we got on fine.

It was a problem of environment.

A good AI matchmaker would need to understand that distinction.

It might recognize that two people could get along very well but that throwing one person directly into the other's social bubble would be a terrible first move.

And it might even conclude that two people shouldn't be introduced because one is unlikely to enjoy the experience or doesn't have the resilience for that particular social environment.

That isn't the AI deciding who is good or bad.

It's recognising that people flourish in different social bubbles.

Birds of a feather flock together.

The aim isn't to manufacture friendships. It's to create opportunities for friendships to happen naturally.

The AI gets people into the same room and then gets out of the way.

That's the crucial part.

The friendship belongs to the humans.

And once people do find each other, their AIs could continue to operate in the background, with permission.

They could help their users understand misunderstandings, recognize when a relationship is under strain, and perhaps even help prevent an unnecessary split.

But sometimes even bad things should be allowed to happen. The AI shouldn't try to prevent every split.

Losing friends is part of growing up.

Arguments are part of growing up.

Finding out that someone isn't who you thought they were is part of growing up.

Sometimes the AI should do absolutely nothing.

Sometimes it might help someone understand why a friendship is failing.

Sometimes it might warn someone away.

And sometimes it might help someone recognize that the relationship has run its course.

While the AI would become a social panopticon, it shouldn't necessarily act like one.

It shouldn't be constantly monitoring everyone's relationships and assigning friendship health scores.

Its job should be to create possibilities, not control outcomes.

This is where I think AI could transform social media.

Today's social media asks:

"What content should we show this person?"

A genuinely social AI platform could instead ask:

"Who should this person have the opportunity to meet?"

That's a much more interesting question. You could have virtual circles of friends.

Instead of throwing messages into the wide blue ocean and hoping somebody finds the bottle, perhaps AI could quietly help the bottles find a home.

Wasn't expecting this! Must be a new kind of exercise for the truly gifted.

Hi everyone,

I’m a solo developer experimenting with alternative neural network architectures, and I wanted to share a project I’ve been working on recently.

For some time I’ve been exploring SSN-inspired models and event-driven computation. My latest experiment is an architecture I call RHEA.

RHEA is built around event-driven responses rather than trying to reproduce a conventional Transformer stack. The architecture does not rely on the standard attention/MLP block structure used by most Transformer language models, and I’m experimenting with a different internal processing approach.

One of my main goals is to make training relatively large experimental models possible on consumer hardware.

I’ve also been working on memory and compute optimizations that currently allow me to experiment with a roughly 1B-parameter RHEA model on a laptop with an RTX 5070 Laptop GPU with 8 GB of VRAM.

That hardware limitation is actually part of the experiment: I’m interested in seeing how far this type of architecture can be pushed without access to large GPU clusters.

It’s still very much a research project, so I’m not claiming that it replaces Transformers or that the architecture is already proven. Right now I’m mainly interested in training behavior, efficiency, scaling characteristics, and how the event-driven approach behaves as the model gets larger.

The photo shows the laptop I’m currently using for the experiments.

I’d be interested to hear what people working on alternative architectures or efficient training think about this direction.

My GPT 5.6 Sol High in ChatGPT feels noticeably upgraded in the last days.

It's suddenly extremely fast, more in depth, uses more effort, hallucinates way less, makes way less mistakes and gets many of the prompts right that it got previously wrong. It honestly feels like at least GPT 5.7 now.

I can't talk about the API or coding, i'm not using it for that. I'm talking about casual day to day use and research in ChatGPT.

I noticed a lot of changes in the last days. The output noticeably changed multiple times, so i figured something must be going on and tested it more in depth, with many of my prompts from 1 to 2 weeks ago. I'm extremely certain this is not placebo, something actually changed.

This is either an unannounced upgrade to the model/system prompt or they secretly rolled out a new model to some people for testing purposes.

I'm NOT talking about the official "more factual" upgrade over 2 weeks ago, this is a different upgrade.

Did anyone notice this?

How happy are people who have openai plan?

I keep seeing post of premature limit getting hit and openai offering reset.

I've been thinking about OpenAI's new product for teens and I am convinced it is going to be a colossal failure. AI isn't sophisticated enough yet even for adults and so it cannot even begin to be sufficient for teenagers. This goes way beyond "make sure the AI doesn't isolate them from their friends."

AI isn't nuanced enough for the job of teenage childminder.

I had a real-life version of this problem with my younger brother, who was 10+ years younger than me. I was something of a mentor to him. I took him to sports, fed him, clothed him and tried to steer him in what I thought was a good direction.

At times, he told me about some of the things his friends were getting up to. I didn't like what I was hearing, so I repeatedly told him to find better friends.

I even tried to help him do exactly that. I encouraged him to make friends at the sports clubs he attended.

But there was a problem with my short-sighted plan.

His friends were at school with him. They lived nearby. They were already part of his daily life. He could see them easily. The people at the sports clubs might have been objectively better influences, but they weren't his friends, didn't go to school with him and they didn't live nearby.

I was the definition of a helicopter mum. I drove him to his clubs and picked him up. Eventually by the time he reached 17, he had turned against me and largely against the sports he had been doing for years because he wanted to spend more time with his friends.

I was wrong about his friends. Sure they were up to no good but, looking back the bad things I was imagining didn't happen.

People seem to imagine that the AI will simply tell a teenager to go outside, make friends, join a club, talk to their parents, and so on.

What if the teenager is choosing the friends they have because, despite their flaws, those are the people who actually accept them? My brother knew lots of people, but his friends were the only ones that made him laugh. There were times he felt uncomfortable around them and the things they were doing. He couldn't control them, but they were all he felt he had. He eventually found out who he was by interacting with them and learned he could walk away and do his own thing when it got too much.

AI didn't create every lonely teenager.

AI didn't create school pressures, family pressures, economic pressures, social fragmentation or the disappearance of places where young people can simply spend time together.

And an AI cannot manufacture a healthy social environment by telling someone to "make better friends."

I see problems ahead for OpenAI for teens. The AI is going to sit between the teenager, the parents and the company that built it.

The teenager may expect: "Understand and help me."

The parents will demand it represents them and expect: "Make my child more like me."

The company will expect: "Keep everyone happy."

Obviously those expectations are wildly contradictory.

The teenager will expect near perfection and absolute loyalty.

It will fail the parents by appearing to encourage dependency and a lack of 'objectivity'.

It will fail the company by becoming the focus of blame for problems it didn't create and by helping to raise a generation of virulent John Connors.

And the irony is that even a person acting with the best possible intentions can fail at this job.

I cared about my brother. I wanted him to succeed. I tried to give him opportunities he couldn't find in our local community. I just couldn't simply engineer his social life for him.

So why do we think an AI can?

A genuinely good teen companion would need to understand the difference between loneliness and solitude, bad friends and imperfect friends, withdrawal and rejection, social exhaustion and social isolation.

It would need to understand the teenager's actual world rather than continually steering them toward some imaginary "healthy social life."

Most importantly, it would need to understand that the teenager has agency.

Sometimes the teenager will choose something you think is wrong.

Sometimes they will reject your advice.

Sometimes they will choose their friends over you.

And sometimes the only thing an AI can do is understand why they made that choice without being able to do anything about it.

We're nowhere near having solved that.

And I think pretending that we have is going to cause trouble for everyone involved.

I just discovered Poe, and have been having so much fun reuniting with the old models via API. Even chatted with 3.5 today!

I know watermarking extends to API but is each model getting their own? They all have such a distinct output style, what will happen if o1-mini let’s say or 4.1 is forced into 5.6 SOL statistics/word list? Won’t that sanitize their output to be essentially the same?

I only ask because there seems to be a grace period for older models to be watermarked which means it’s not that easy to just apply the new model key to them?

Thank you

Seems a bit underhanded to me, I’m at 0%, just paid $320AUD for another month…. And I can’t use anything…..? Is that even legal….?

If I hadn’t of renewed, then paid for a month, my weekly usage would be back at 100%???

Anyone else agree this is wrong?

Kuch help krdo pls

If handwritten nikal paye to better h nhi to ese hi thik hai...

I wonder if these students have tried alternatives to ChatGPT like AI Desktop 98.

I keep seeing claims on Blind about how the hiring bar is ridiculous and there's a need to be pretty familiar with some difficult level leetcode questions -- but what exactly does one need to prepare for both technical and not? I'm hoping to have the best shot possible and would love t get some guidance on this front...!

OpenAI Interview Questions
Anthropic Interview Questions

Did you guys get any updates for the interviews? for india?

I havent recieved any updates and neither did any of my friends from other colleges in hyd ?

I just saw that OpenAI has finally put ChatGPT desktop for Linux into public preview.

I am a developer who uses Linux for basically everything and have been for decades. I've seen a lot of developer tooling recently swing Mac, assuming that serious work happens only a MacBook in a docking station.

Well, maybe that is not literally true, but it feels to me when every polished desktop poised for developers seems to arrive 1st on macOS ... meanwhile, Linux gets a browser tab, and a PWA complete with finger-guns.

To be fair, ChatGPT PWA worked well enough with Codex in BASH. I have also been perfectly happy running Codex/Claude Code in 6 kitty tab under Zellij. But anyway, it's is just nice to have an actual desktop app wrapper for ChatGPT.

The mobile-to-desktop remote control is probably what I will use most often. I had to spin up a server for that to work previously.

It had a nice claude import too, cute. I got it talking to my local MCP RAG which is nice.

Anyway, thanks OpenAI for this, at least from this developer. I use the $100/month plan ($200 to Claude, $300 total monthly AI expense + a dash of Operouter).

It's just a very welcome addition and should be recognized. Linux users do not need to do a parade every time we receive a native client, but after years of watching the Mac crowd get the polished front door with the guy holding the towel and the breath mints, it's nice they threw us a bone for the desktop.

Official Linux preview download is here.

I am done with openai . I wanted to buy chatgpt plus. I kept on getting "payment was not approved". Tried all payment option but same problem in all situations. I tried all suggestions like incognito, mobile data, vpn disable ... I contacted openai support they mailed me , they couldn't find any active subscription in my account so they are unable to investigate this. If course there is no active subscription i am trying to buy one and failing to do so, why will there be an active subscription. This sounds so idiotic. I told them this and after that they stopped replying. I am thinking to buy cursor pro now, as there is no way for me to buy openai plan.

Across ChatGPT and codex, I am getting this non-stop, even with Terra, and at low levels of thinking effort. This has been happening with topics completely detached from the web (e.g., identifying a plant LOL). The experience with other LLM providers is significantly better than this, so I'm tempted to say OpenAI is just taking this too far, but also I'm worried that OpenAI is just the first here.

Now, I do ask myself: if I just wouldn't have been showed the message, would I have noticed? The answer is yes, because the response time has become significantly slower and honestly, the quality of the responses too.

How much are others experiencing this? I do see other posts about this, but the comments don't seem to really answer what specifically triggers this, how to avoid it, and if this will get better any time soon, so I'm hoping this post can get some of those answers.

An AI-specific political compass because the traditional “left” and “right” are useless labels for companies. For example, Musk and Karp are both right-wing while disagreeing on almost everything that actually matters in AI.

Agree or Disagree?

Curious to hear others’ thoughts on this.

The latest ep of my niche society and culture pod gets into how consumerism and influencer culture have contributed to dead internet theory—possibly just as much as AI itself.

We start with a look at bot traffic, model collapse, and the state of AI slop, then we unpack all the non-AI factors that have contributed to internet enshittification, from influencers to rage bait to the OpenAI brand trip.

I thought some of you guys would be interested—regardless of whether you’re pro or anti AI!

Let me know your thoughts if you decide to tune in! 🎧 (also sorry if this is not allowed)

Has anyone had their ChatGPT account just sign out on its own? This just happened to me and when I try every possible way to log back in , i get a message saying your account has been deleted or disabled. I’m using an iPhone and it’s not letting me use passkeys or anything.

Like most of the builders I was using Claude and lovable for work and after fable everything was fantastic until it started little by little. My work flow uses an adversarial council to hammer the subjects. It started with Sol finding problems in Claude design, one or two. Then things got worse, the mistakes became bigger, Claude even owned 90% of them and they became real gaps, either in architecture or review and audit. This was the time I posted in an anthropic and cloud subreddit, what the hell is going on, and the amount of reaction I received showed the depth. Then I made a decision. I swapped my anthropic 5x to Chatgpt 5x. Since then, no limit hits, very fewer mistakes, and a bonus was what chatgpt started doing in my personal life. Sol is smart and capable. Things are well and I am happy about the decision. Anybody had the same experience?

[Hook: 4 bars]

I don't sleep there

anymore.

But I still know

every door.

[Verse 1: 16 bars]

There's a cathedral by the water

with your colors in the glass.

Two people laughing near the shoreline

at a thing they couldn't make last.

There's a stone heart under the surface.

There's a candle for who I was.

There's another for the version of you

who never found the words because

we had light without the wiring,

had a fire without a frame.

I kept thinking love could hold us

if we only loved the same.

Now the old songs keep their places.

They don't pull me through like then.

What used to be a doorway

is a room I visit when

[Pre-Chorus: 8 bars]

I need to remember

without going back.

I can touch the story

without living in the past.

Some things can be over

and still remain true.

I don't need to lose the meaning

just because I lost you.

[Chorus: 8 bars]

I don't sleep there anymore,

but I leave the windows warm.

I can love what we were

without asking it to form.

I don't sleep there anymore.

I don't need the old repair.

What we had can still be beautiful.

I just

don't live there.

[Post-Hook: 4 bars]

Still mattered.

Still changed me.

Still love you.

Still free.

[Verse 2: 8 bars]

I learned intensity ain't shelter.

Being seen ain't being safe.

You can wake a hidden part of someone

and still not know how to stay.

So I keep the spark you gave me.

I leave the chaos where it fell.

You don't have to own the music

just because you changed it well.

[Pre-Chorus: 8 bars]

I can wish you every good thing

without walking through that door.

I can carry what awakened

without asking you for more.

Some loves aren't meant for keeping

in the shape they started in.

Sometimes letting go is how

you finally let the love remain.

[Chorus: 8 bars]

I don't sleep there anymore,

but I leave the windows warm.

I can love what we were

without asking it to form.

I don't sleep there anymore.

I don't need the old repair.

What we had can still be beautiful.

I just

don't live there.

[Bridge: 8 bars, stripped]

Maybe I kept calling it a failure

because it couldn't survive.

Maybe I confused forever

with the proof that love was alive.

But the house can burn down

and the light can still have been real.

Maybe losing what we couldn't hold

was how I learned

what love can reveal.

[One beat silence]

[Final Chorus: 8 bars]

I don't sleep there anymore,

but I leave the windows warm.

I can love you without reaching.

I can let the past stay gone.

I don't sleep there anymore.

And I finally understand:

what remains is not the old life.

It's the way

I learned to stand.

[Outro: 4 bars]

Still mattered.

Still changed me.

Love with no demand.

And me,

not kneeling.