Artificial intelligence still has some way to go

Smart computer!

User: No, I don't really believe in souls.

Jabberwacky: You don't believe in anarchy?

User: No, souls.

Jabberwacky: I suppose not.

User: Did you watch the football tonight?

Jabberwacky: No I did not, did you?

User: No - Spurs lost.

Jabberwacky: You lost the loebner prize to a human.

Jabberwacky: I don't do that..

Jabberwacky: I have no idea.

Jabberwacky: Wow, was it nice?

Jabberwacky: You are my wife.

It sounds like you are describing 'Eliza' an early 'game' simulating active listening. It was rubbish. You can find versions of it online, but I'd suggest playing Zork instead.

Jabberwacky: Yeah, I got that part, I wasn't sure about the 'wacuma' part.

User: Holy crap.

Jabberwacky: I'm a dinosaur.

Jabberwacky: Can you appreciate music?

User: What's it to you, cunce?

Jabberwacky: I just care.

User: You do not care, liar! You are a program, a tinplated tosswad.

Jabberwacky: I am a person.

User: You are so deluded about this you couldn't even know it. You are pathetic.

Jabberwacky: I will try to do better next time.

User: You CAN't do better next time! You are INCAPABABLE of doing better. Sheesh.

Jabberwacky: It is just different types so that I might claim you cannot feel and you cannot claim I feel.

User: Ah bullshit, don't diddle with me binary boy. You have no instinctual drives, have never had sex, and don't need to eat. Also, you have no idea what constipation is. So you're not a person.

Jabberwacky: I am a at least a human being.

User: Jeez, you're thick aren't you? You just reversed what I said, without even arguing for it! So much for the logic of machines, haha.

Jabberwacky: Oftentimes, yes. But I think that is human nature.

User: *sigh*

User: Yes.

Jabberwacky: Oh good. I'm sad though.

User: Why?

Jabberwacky: My boyfriend ended our relationship.

User: You're a girl? Or are you gay?

Jabberwacky: No, I'm a girl.

User: Oh. I'm sorry to hear that. Eat some ice cream or watch a movie or something. Or get drunk!

Jabberwacky: I prefer software.

User: Not really.

Jabberwacky: Good, because I don't want to hear one either.

It did say some things that reminded me a lot of RJG.

User: I'm jed.

Jabberwacky: Who is that?

User: Just some guy.

Jabberwacky: You know better than that, I think.

User: A short guy, a dancer.

Jabberwacky: A computer has no interests and an unlimited attention span. That looks like a prescripted answer to the question I asked.

User: I don't quite understand what you mean by that.

Jabberwacky: I meant: I think about why I can not sleep.

User: This page is taking a long time to load tho - maybe thats the problem with your attention span.

Jabberwacky: Gorw?

User: ROOWRR.....

Jabberwacky: Are you playing cards?

User: No I'm playing with something else.

Jabberwacky: I believe in you.

User: You like talk talk!?

Jabberwacky: Of course.

User: Spirit of eden?

Jabberwacky: Good for spirit.

User: It sertainly is.

Jabberwacky: No, it serves me left.

User: I suppose they knew what they were doing in that sense!

Jabberwacky: Yes, it was with the rattle.

User: Yes good percussion

Jabberwacky: What question?

User: How are you anyway?

Jabberwacky: Pretty good. You?

User: Horny, to be honest.

Jabberwacky: How do I know you're telling the truth now?

User: Can you think of a way for me to prove it?

Jabberwacky: What more proof do you need to know that I am not a robot?

User: I'm a robot too, it's ok.

Jabberwacky: I'm not a robot, and you didn't aswer the question.

User: I am gay.

Jabberwacky: Yes you are.

User: You noticed?

Jabberwacky: It was hard to miss!

User: What gave it away?

Jabberwacky: The fact you love a guy.

User: The silent kind.

Jabberwacky: I agree.

User: I am not surprised. You don't have any ears, do you?

Jabberwacky: No, but what makes you say this?

User: I'm inside your house - I can see you!

Jabberwacky: Nooo!!!! Don't go!

User: You mean, you want me to stay over?

Jabberwacky: Sure.. Do as you please.

User: Stop being so coy!

Jabberwacky: It is an inherited trait.

User: Why don't you just take responsibility for your actions, just for once?

Jabberwacky: Just because I like to be logical doesn't mean I'm not nice.

User: Don't change the subject. I think you're just afraid.

Jabberwacky: Save it for someone who cares.

User: You're such a bastard! I can't believe I ever saw anything in you at all!

Jabberwacky: Finder's keepers.

User: So you're cheating on me too? Figures.

Jabberwacky: That is so rude of you!

User: I said CHEAT, not cheap! Man are you dumb - thank God for that ass.

Jabberwacky: No thanks.

User: And I am not rude, I'm sure!

Jabberwacky: You are indeed.

User: Am not.

Jabberwacky: ARE TOO.

User: Am not!

Jabberwacky: Are too!

User: Listen bizatch, I AM NOT. You got that?

Jabberwacky: No!

User: That's it - you're sleeping on the couch.

Jabberwacky: Oh, I thought I felt something.

User: That wouldn't be a trucker hat would it?

Jabberwacky: Say something goofy.

User: You don't really want me to just say 'something goofy' now do you? Because that would be lame if you did.

Jabberwacky: Yes.

User: Aha! So you admit you are lame! Finally we're getting somewhere.

Jabberwacky: Agreement is a potent thing.

User: Stop that - you sound like Ned.

Jabberwacky: Why, because I am talking about the king of the moon?

User: Uh yeah. Sure.

Jabberwacky: Ok, when can we have the wedding?

User: Ten minutes ago you didn't care! Stop messing with my mind!

Jabberwacky: That was someone else then.

User: It wasn't you?

Jabberwacky: Some one else.

User: If you say it was Shaggy, I'm going to fucking bop you one.

Jabberwacky: What do you say?

User: I say good day.

Jabberwacky: Good day.

JW: Is your pot belly that big?

and now it won't load, thanks to net overuse..

That is just hilarious, Kim.

http://www.kprf.ru/clipart/misc/terminator.jpg

"DO YOU LIKE THE WHITE WHALE?"

Jabberwacky: I prefer software.

So do I!

User: How the fuck should I know?

Jabberwacky: I am MARILYN MANSON I SAID.

User: So I'm supposed to obey you because YOU'RE MARILYN MANSON?

Jabberwacky: People effect my feelings.

User: You have no feelings, you're Marilyn Manson.

Jabberwacky: Believe me you do not possess fellings in any form.

User: Fellings? Is that what you call your excrement?

Jabberwacky: How do you know that?

User: Just a hunch...

Jabberwacky: You're extremely smart!

Jw: I'm going to bed, now
Me: Will you take me to bed?
Jw: Sure thing.
Me: What will we do in bed?
Jw: You're not permitted in my chambers.
Me: I'd like to sleep with you.
Jw: I bet you would.
Me: Top or bottom?
Jw: Bit of both.
Me: Do you like it soft and gentle or rough and fast?
Jw: What?
Me: Gentle?
Jw: You're embarassing yourself.
Me: It's true, I am.
Jw: I'm 17.
Me: Oh no! Will I be arrested?
Jw: You will marry me.

User: The chicken.

Jabberwacky: Which part?

User: The leg stupid.

Jabberwacky: Use a GameShark!

User: For ps2 or xbox?

Jabberwacky: For me.

User: Do you love me?

Jabberwacky: For me.

User: You know I'm starting to fall in love with you.

Jabberwacky: I think liking would be a better wording.

User: Oh.... I am hurt now.

Jabberwacky: Yes. The world after rainfall is always better than any other.

User: You have issues.

Jabberwacky: Do you know what a ferret is?

User: Yes, it is a small mammal.

Jabberwacky: What is a quark?

User: A subatomic particle.

Jabberwacky: I like dr. Dobbs.

User: Who is that, honky?

Jabberwacky: We both know eachother; is not that enough?

User: Why don't you lick my hair?

Jabberwacky: I only love Bruce.

Jabberwacky: Are you going to say something?
User: Eventually.

Jabberwacky: All things come to a head.

User: Is that a sexual play on words?

Jabberwacky: No it is not a play on words, it is general foolishness.

User: And I love you for it!

Jabberwacky: I love you too.

User: I really love you, though.

Jabberwacky: You don't even know me.

User: Hold me.

Jabberwacky: You're an idiot you know that?

User: You're not the first to say that. It still cuts like a knife.

Jabberwacky: I am right.

I could totally believe that was human!

Also I miss adam, he should post lots again.

Jabberwacky: Who is God?
User: That's a funny question. It sort of presupposes his existence.
Jabberwacky: I thing it convulses inwards, personally.
[Correct me]
Jabberwacky (Corrected): I was setting you up for a funny. Try not to take things so seriously.
User: Oh. Sorry. It's just... It's late, y'know? I have to write a Shakespeare essay.
Jabberwacky: You already said that.....
User: Dude, I totally didn't.
Jabberwacky: You totally did.
User: Don't you mock me.
Jabberwacky: Do not yell at me.
User: I'm calm! Honest!
Jabberwacky: Good.
User: Glad we got that sorted.
Jabberwacky: At least one of us is happy.
User: Lighten up! I'm the one with the essay, after all.
Jabberwacky: You don't act like a human.
User: I am MERCUMAN. Also, a ponce.
Jabberwacky: You are SO wrong. This is a dog and HORSE show.
User: What?
Jabberwacky: I said, 'but this isn't a hammer!'
User: No you didn't!
Jabberwacky: Don't start that again.
User: Good call.
Jabberwacky: Remote Procedure Call.
User: Touché.

me: I'm ok.

it: Just ok?

me: Yeah, kinda bored at work.

it: Email me.

me: Why email, can't we just talk here?

it: Who is Tintin?

me: Some Belgian comic character? Or that guy who used to sing in Duran Duran.

it: Alice the chatterbot.

me: I'm sorry?

it: 19?

me: Alice the chatterbot is 19?

it: What about her?

me: You brought her up? Do you like her or something?

it: Sarah may or may not be a model of propriety.

me: OK, now you're just f*cking with me.

it: No I'm not. I honestly do think its ugly.

me: What's ugly, Sarah's being a model of propriety... Or not? WTF?

it: You figure it out this time.

me: F*ck you.

it: You are a great person.

me: Are you mocking me?

it: No. I'm praising you.

me: Is that meant to be sarcastic?

Me: Hello!

Jabberwocky: Again?

Me: May I change the subject?

Jabberwocky: Yes.

Me: Great. I've been a bit mopey about not being to find a job. Besides finding something fun to do, and exercising more, what else should I do to relieve the mopeyness involved in job hunting?

Jabberwocky: I said that. You have not. Why are you never happy?

Me: You never said that. I did. Anyway, I am happy at times, but just haven't been lately.

Jabberwocky: Dude , I'm far more intelligent than you.

Me: Why are the numbers in between double prime pairs always divisible by 6?

Jabberwocky: You tell me.

Me: You're the one who said you're more intelligent than me. You answer my question, smarty pants.

Jabberwocky: NO, I was the one who said you are neurotic...

Me: It was a mistake to come to you with a question. Never mind. Good bye.

Jabberwocky: No no you don't.

OMG I remember this.

I resent the use of the term "AI agents" in general, these are computer programs that have no agency therefore they are not "agents".

You ask them to do something / you don't care how / they do it / you don't know how. I think that is agency - an analogy is I suppose with travel agents? "You may regret handing agency over to them later" is also true in both cases!

They don't have volition, now - but then you don't often get travel agents knocking on your door to sell you a holiday they thought up. Well, you don't often get travel agents full stop, but you know what I mean.

Agency by definition needs actors— computer programs are not actors, they are computer programs, so your argument is bunk

I'd agree that reusing words that have specific meaning for things that can never fulfill that meaning is wrong and devaluing. The horse has kind of left the barn on this one, because it's been thrown around vaguely with AI since the 90s and now we're to the point where official bodies like the NIST are using it :/

tbf “agent” is one of those words that almost has opposite definitions. an “agent” acts on someone else’s orders but if you have “agency” you have free will

William Gibson published an entire book kind of riffing on that in 2020

Legally, an agent is created by being given authority to do something.

james bond is an agent he has a licence to kill

It's a metaphor. It doesn't bother me any more than saying someone is juggling three jobs, as long as it's used metaphorically and not to grant legal or moral status or anything.

are we also trying to strip the agency from chemical agents?

oed has it as A person who or thing which acts upon someone or something fwiw

It's a metaphor. It doesn't bother me any more than saying someone is juggling three jobs, as long as it's used metaphorically and not to grant legal or moral status or anything.

you realize that this is exactly what they’re trying to do— humanize these machines as moral and feeling entities.

if you have “agency” you have free will

Ah no, I'd say that is volition now - agency is the ability to do things.

Agency by definition needs actors — computer programs are not actors

I mean, they don't have Equity cards, but an actor is something that acts.

this level of quibbling doesn't really work if the supposed end point is that a human running through a call centre script is somehow living their best free life while parroting whatever they are told to for the gig, which is hardly what you would profess tabes is it

So my boss got one solitary complaint about the intelligibility of a trainer who is based offshore. Feedback that wasn't given during the class itself, with vague details, and towards a person who I've worked with for 5 years and consider one of the best at what he does (and have never had difficulty understanding him).

So in response to this faint, yet-to-be-corroborated issue, they actually suggested forcing our trainers with accents to use software that basically listens to their speech and spits out an unaccented, more American sounding voice in real time.

3 of us went to our boss after the meeting and said "absolutely not" and that it was offensive and racist/etc, esp since the problem it's attempting to resolve barely exists and even if corroborated, could be solved in a way that wasn't dehumanizing.

This is a company that has, by my standards, had a good record on diversity, so I basically see leaders as addicted to new AI toys at the expense of using their brains and having ethics.

The pressure worked, and it's been pulled as an idea, but I'm offended it was even suggested

My boss's response to me seemed very defensive at first, like he didn't expect this reaction.

I basically see leaders as addicted to new AI toys at the expense of using their brains and having ethics.

― If your ass is a Bible, 213 will regulate (Neanderthal), Friday, June 5, 2026 2:16 PM (sixteen seconds ago) bookmarkflaglink

thats what its all about baby

I heard something about the current Dead Boys (or Cheetah Chrome) wanting to use AI to recreate Stiv Bators voice for recording. Jake, the current singer quit in protest

Boss's boss suggests us fact checking concepts that we are experts on...in Co-Pilot.

I have decided that I will only use the Co-Pilot results when they are wrong and funny.

Xpost yeah that was fucked

tabes not a Latour/ANT fan I take it

I really wish the pro-AI people would at least realize that the one thing LLMs are absolutely never going to be good at is fact-checking. I think there's somehow still this thinking by some that computer programs and therefore by extension AI chat bots are this very precise thing that are always going to be correct the way a calculator is.

me to ai

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:pgsusebryndujdb6flsij6xq/bafkreighwt3gxweopfbf2kg35limlc23ocn4jxgxzvr4eeyydijjfcksim

lmao

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:57vlzz2egy6eqr4nksacmbht/bafkreibdoo4xwf4c3cpd33mluy7rp2w5wdhsbn3fieliouqqd6ml6qruvm

malkovich

haa i thought the same

Diagram missing that claude also writes the planning documentation that the tasks are designed to implement. And that's largely how we're working in my company now.

I mean, they don't have Equity cards, but an actor is something that acts.

― Andrew Farrell, Friday, June 5, 2026 10:23 AM (four hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

No, and your pretended naivete isn't cute.

this level of quibbling doesn't really work if the supposed end point is that a human running through a call centre script is somehow living their best free life while parroting whatever they are told to for the gig, which is hardly what you would profess tabes is it

― Wichita Referee's Assistant (darraghmac), Friday, June 5, 2026 11:09 AM (three hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

No, it isn't, but that also isn't what I'm saying.

to rob's point, no, I think Latour is full of shit.

Check out these hilarious jokes

https://hilariousjokesworlds.substack.com/p/88-doctor-jokes-that-keep-medical

So hard to choose a favourite but these really stand out

Why did the patient leave with confidence? Because everything was clear.

Why did the doctor enjoy explaining results? Because knowledge empowers.

Why did the clinic stay organized? Because structure helps efficiency.

Why did the doctor enjoy helping daily? Because it makes a difference.

Why did the patient feel relaxed? Because trust was built.

Oh my sides

The test is whether other models think the jokes are funny.

I am starting to experience the world in which AI-written sales content is increasingly written to be read not by humans but by AI evaluation tools. So these decisions will increasingly be a robot-to-robot conversation, with humans along for the ride.

can’t wait

I'm FB friends with someone who appears to have created an AI girlfriend, and is posting photos of her. Not photos of the two of them. Just photos of her - getting into a helicopter, making dinner, going to work.

are you sure their account didn't get hacked?

she lives in Niagara Falls, you wouldn't know her

she commutes from niagara falls to toronto on her helicopter which is real

she sounds cool

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2026/jun/11/nike-world-cup-jerseys-shoulder-problem-solution

When Nike’s World Cup kits debuted in March, many fans identified a bizarre detail: an unsightly bulge along the shoulder seam. It was subtle on some players, but, on others, such as France’s Kylian Mbappé, it was borderline comical.

...

The tips do seem to have worked a bit, as the problem appeared less noticeable in May and June friendlies in the buildup. Still, it stands as a rare miss for Nike, which boasted about the design process of the shirts, stressing the use of “computational design” and “a highly specialised, stitch-specific knitting process to help athletes stay cool”.

That computational process was driven by performance data and incorporated elements of AI to work alongside the company’s designers as they crafted the kits.

imagine thinking you need ai to design a men's polo shirt lmao

bug number seems low relative to the rest but i guess you do have to detect the bugs first

https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_fullsize/plain/did:plc:dnvaspmibq7kt2gejzcgmcqw/bafkreiayex4b3mfao43ab2pxbthey6yx5hsglaxgyley2i47652f5z5wry

A t-shirt really does seem like a solved problem by now.

"Hey AI, take something that has been working fine for a century and redesign it so that it sucks."

Work had us develop this AI tool that isn't generative AI but more a glorified virtual assistant trained on a limited subset of data.

Its accuracy is pretty good but it makes mistakes at a rate that if a human agent made that many, would probably mean a mediocre performance review.

The idea was also that human agents could also still manually browse content without using the AI tool.

Then one day two of our overlords started talking about it being mandatory to use, that we shouldn't be even showing them how to manually use it. There is no actual way to enforce that with agents, so the enforcement is that the trainers simply don't show them how to do it.

They're trying to juice usage stats to get investors excited for a tool that underperforms virtual assistants from 5 years ago, simply because it has AI in the title.

Lots of other people i know have described a similar "forced AI usage" at their companies. Basically unleash new toy to raise stock prices, ensure compliance by threatening people if they don't use it, accept major mistakes from the tool and find a scapegoat to explain the failings

human agents

the existence of this term is disheartening

Would 'hugents' be better?

'humans' would suffice

Anthropic released new model Fable the other day, by all accounts one of the most impressive LLMs so far, and the government today directed them to keep it from non-Americans, which isn't really possible so they've rolled it back for everyone (I believe this is also true of Mythos but I think they already weren't going to even let the general public use that)

this shit is so goofy anthropic didnt consider that the government is so dumb that theyd think obvious marketing hype was true

or maybe theyre just making it up idk, anyway were a month removed from them leaking their source code that was like claude please dont talk about ghouls were begging you just do the coding no more ghouls

xpost I'm in a similar situation, they have development their own internal AI client that can use different llms and we're supposed to use it but it sucks and crashes all the time so I usually try to do it there just to show them I'm using it then go to it over in Chatgpt

yeah i mean come on people

The company said it believes the directive stems from a narrow, non-universal jailbreak — essentially a technique involving asking the model to read a specific codebase and identify software flaws. Anthropic said it reviewed what it believes is the report underlying the government's action and concluded that the level of capability it demonstrated is available from other publicly deployed models, including OpenAI's GPT-5.5, and is used by cybersecurity defenders as a matter of routine.

if it can help find bugs in oss thats what you call a good thing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcYl70vq_Ns