标签：#artificial

Good system. One addition that moved the needle for me: ​ I track "capacity conversion" -- when AI saves me 3 hours on a task what do those 3 hours actually become? ​ Most people save time with AI and then fill it with more busywork. The ROI only materializes when you deliberately redirect saved time toward higher-value activities. ​ I keep a simple log: "AI saved X hours on [task]. Redirected to [activity]. Value of redirected time: [$amount]." ​ After 6 months, my actual ROI was 4x higher than the "time saved" metric suggested because of where the saved time went. ​ submitted by /u/JaredSanborn [link] [留言]

When a platform started with total developer autonomy, teams felt overwhelmed and ended up solving the same problems in completely different ways. The company shifted to enablement over support, working together with teams intensively, and helping teams feel confident and capable, turning the right way into being the easiest way. By Ben Linders

Google DeepMind is funding research into the potential dangers of situations where millions of different AI agents interact with each other online. According to Rohin Shah, who directs the company’s AGI safety and alignment research, the mass-market arrival of agents that can carry out tasks without human oversight and follow instructions given to them by other…

A lot of discussion about Fable 5 has focused on the visible restrictions: cybersecurity, biology, certain chemistry. You hit a wall, you get a notification, you get redirected to Opus 4.8. That's frustrating, but at least it's honest. At least you know the model stepped back. Here's the part that's really disturbing, buried in a 319-page system card: There's a second category of restriction. For AI development and research work, Fable 5 doesn't redirect you. It doesn't notify you. It responds. It just delivers a deliberately weakened answer, and the system card describes this explicitly as "not visible to the user." Anthropic walked this back within 24 hours after fierce backlash. They apologized. "We made the wrong tradeoff." Good. But sit with what actually happened here, because the reversal is being treated as the end of the story when it's the beginning of a much harder problem. We now know three things we cannot unknow: Anthropic built this. They shipped it. And they only reversed it when the backlash was loud enough. The question isn't whether this specific invisible downgrade still exists. The question is what else might they be doing, in categories that don't generate the same backlash, that isn't disclosed in a document most people will never read anyway. This is a new kind of problem. And to understand why, you have to take a step back for a second. The pattern In January 2026, OpenAI announced that they would retire GPT-4o. Hundreds of thousands of daily users had built working relationships with that model over months: preferences it learned, corrections they made, communication styles that developed through hundreds of sessions. Gone. In February 2026, Gemini users found their chat histories had quietly vanished. No warning. No export. In April, Anthropic cut off Claude Pro and Max subscribers from using their subscriptions with third-party tools. Workflows that people depended on broke overnight. Each of these was framed differently. Model retirement

Every layer of AI solved the problem the last one left behind. The unsolved one: a shared, measurable standard for how to RUN intelligence — yours and the AI's, together. I spent 10+ years writing it down and it's falsifiable (pre-registered tests, failure lines locked before data). Asking for your strongest critiques Essay: https://joshmason573557.substack.com/p/colive-the-missing-standard-for-the submitted by /u/Useful-Ad-7895 [link] [留言]

I think it is but I'd just like to get some second opinions, especially from music creators. This is their spotify page https://open.spotify.com/artist/4dSJvPjnA1RU6KcngvaZ96 The artwork is definitely AI and there's no real composer name so some red flags there already. submitted by /u/WelderRound2925 [link] [留言]

submitted by /u/Tiny-Independent273 [link] [留言]

I'm really interested in trying to learn about this new concept of having a one central AI-powered database acting as a digital brain for your business, pulling in all of the various data sources and having one single source of truth. People like Nate B Jones talk about it and I really want to try to build something - but concious how wrong they can go. Are there any credible ones already build I can base off? Has anyone done this? submitted by /u/zascar [link] [留言]

anthropic just released fable 5 two days ago and i haven’t had a chance to properly dig in yet for context it’s basically a public version of mythos, the model they’d been keeping locked behind project glasswing for select partners only. now it’s out for everyone on pro/max/team plans until june 22 for free, after that it’ll need usage credits from what i’ve read it’s supposed to be insane at long agentic tasks… like multi-hour sessions where it spins up sub-models, gathers data, writes and tests its own code. someone gave it one prompt to build a travel-time map and it went off on its own for hours and just… built it the one catch is it has hard safety blocks in areas like cybersecurity, bio, chem. falls back to opus 4.8 when it hits those but i want to hear from people actually using it right now. what’s the best thing you’ve noticed? and what feels overhyped or still rough? drop your experiments in the comments, genuinely curious submitted by /u/NewMuffin3926 [link] [留言]

Hi, I want to use AI to check my grade with the mark scheme and see what grade it would give me. Now, after doing this, would the assignment be flagged by an AI detector? submitted by /u/No-Witness1045 [link] [留言]

submitted by /u/ThereWas [link] [留言]

submitted by /u/Fcking_Chuck [link] [留言]

I mean human still operates but basically gets one joystick 🕹️ because machine will think for itself how to put its leg better. So some sort of spinal cord intuitive walking. With the library of objects one shouldn’t step on, no way. submitted by /u/Ubud_bamboo_ninja [link] [留言]

Once you start noticing them, they're everywhere. And the algorithm makes it worse, the more you engage, the more it feeds you... Perfect lighting in every single photo. That glow on the face in every other pic or video it doesn't matter what the background or lighting is. Follows 3 people but has 40k followers. Generic bio that could apply to literally anyone. Comments that are just emojis or "love this!" The creepy part is how consistent the patterns are across platforms. Same pose angles. Same aesthetic. Same engagement ratio that makes no sense for a real person. I built a small community tool where people can flag and vote on suspicious profiles. Not trying to be the judge, just crowdsourcing the pattern recognition. I feel humans are really good at spotting these when you give them the right frame and observation. Anyone else been noticing more of these lately? Curious what other people pick up on this. submitted by /u/Brilliant-Nerve-8972 [link] [留言]

Curious about the ones that didn’t stick. everyone talks about what they use but nobody talks about what they tried and dropped and why. submitted by /u/aiprotivity_ [link] [留言]

The company changed course after researchers spoke out against the policy, which would have covertly limited Claude’s ability to develop competing AI models.

For me its summarizing long documents. The first draft looks convincing, but checking missing context and subtle mistakes can take almost as long as doing it manually. Curious which tasks other people expected AI to handle well but still end up reviewing line by line. submitted by /u/Delicious_Weekend546 [link] [留言]

submitted by /u/Vee_Fan38083 [link] [留言]

I built a free 2026 World Cup prediction tool as a fun side project. The soccer part was fun, but the AI part ended up being more interesting. I tested four different prediction views: My own methodology A tournament-read model based on current form, roster age and fitness, squad depth, style matchups, counterattack danger, fatigue, climate, penalties, manager decisions, and bracket path. Betting odds only A market-based view. ChatGPT independent forecast I did not give it my methodology or preferred winner. I simply asked it to build the best prediction it could using its own logic. Gemini logic forecast This one was the most interesting. Gemini asked me who I was rooting for before making its prediction. Then, in my testing, it chose that team to win. When I changed the team I said I was rooting for, Gemini changed the winner to that team too. That stood out to me. Not because it is evil or anything dramatic like that. But it is a good reminder that AI can lean toward making the user happy. If you feed it a bias, it may hand that bias back to you with better wording and more confidence. The biggest lesson from the project was simple: Good input in, good output out. Garbage in, garbage out. AI is powerful, but it still needs human judgment. It can organize thinking, compare logic, test assumptions, and help build something useful. But it still depends on the person using it to understand the situation, challenge weak assumptions, and know when an answer sounds right but may not actually be right. The tool is a standalone HTML file. It is not a live data feed. It does not automatically update injuries, suspensions, weather, lineups, or odds movement. Users can enter live group-stage scores manually, but anything else has to be adjusted by the user. I’m curious how others think about this: When an AI asks for your preference before giving a forecast, is that helpful context, or does it risk steering the answer toward pleasing the user? Also happy to drop a link for d

I generated videos with Omni and want to remove the visible and possibly invisible watermarks it applies. I have only seen tools for pictures but none for videos so far. submitted by /u/Born-Explanation-544 [link] [留言]