Maybe your cultural frame is that mental health isn't a protected category and it's an appropriate insult. That's not what the law says in professional environments and that's not been my experience in professional discourse.
If your attitude is that if one person litters it's now ok for anyone else to dump on protected categories, it's your clubhouse and you can set the rules.
That's your right, and it's also my right to say that I don't want to be associated with this forum even indirectly.
Could you provide me with a good email address to send my CCPA request to delete all my data and comments and account? I sent emails to a few YC addresses with:
"I am writing to request that you delete my personal data from all of your paper and/or computer records pursuant to Section 1798.105 of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)
To the extent that you rely on consent to process my personal data, I withdraw that consent. To the extent that you rely on your 'legitimate interest' to process my personal data, I object to the processing as there are no overriding legitimate grounds.
If you are selling my personal data to third parties, please consider this email as my direction to you not to sell my personal data to third parties.
Please don’t ask me to perform a self-service process such as locating my information on your website, filling out a form, or providing a mobile advertising ID. These requests place an undue burden on my side.
If you are not able to comply with my request to delete all of my personal data, please advise as to the specific reason for which this request cannot be acted on. Please advise which sections and subsections of the law you are relying upon, and identify the specific reason for which you are relying on those exceptions, such as which legal obligation, or internal purpose or use. Please delete all my personal data which does not fall under these exceptions."
I have not received a response.
I can write again in 46 days with a complaint attached mentioning you personally and a letter from my state representative indicating they'd like to know more as well. Or you can resolve this quickly in a mutually amicable way by just deleting my account and all my comments.
Presumably you do a lot of back-and-forth with AI, and as many other commenters have pointed out, this seems to have made you more credulous and less informed.
The US healthcare system is not a market system nor did it occur naturally. Do you have any conflicts of interest that could cause you to have an emotional need to misunderstand basic information about it?
I'm rooting for you, to be clear! It sounds like your approach is more sophisticated than the average, and this is a pain point that is starting to get a lot of attention.
I can deeply, deeply relate. X and Bluesky are both going nuts with ai and ai scams, but _both_ of them banned an advertising account because we were... using a bot to automate behavior because their APIs are only a subset of functionality.
Their vision is a world where they use all the automation regardless of safety or law, and we have to jump through extra hoops and engage in manual processes with AI that literally doesn't have the tool access to do what we need and will not contact a human.
Please, please, please actually do this yourself or read any of the top comments. You are still missing the point, which you will understand if you actually do this and then look at the logs.
I would spend less time with theory and more time with practice to understand what people are getting at. MCP and CLI could, in theory, be the same. But in practice as it stands today, they are not.
> MCP is just a way to write this in a structured way,
Nope! You are not understanding or are actively ignoring the difference which has been explained by 20+ comments just here. It's not a controversial claim, it's a mutually agreed upon matter of fact by the relevant community of users.
The claim you're making right now is believed to be false, and if you know something everyone else doesn't, then you should create an example repo that shows the playwright CLI and playwright MCP add the same number of tokens to context and that both are equally configurable in this respect.
If you can get that right where so many others have failed, that would be a a really big contribution. And if you can't, then you'll understand something first-hand that you weren't able to get while you were thinking about theoretically.
You might believe there is intrinsic sexual dimorphism among mammals and birds. You might even have overwhelming experimental and scientific evidence that proves it. But ask yourself: is it worth losing your job over?
You're stringing together a bunch of weasel words that are not a proof or a plausible suggestion of a proof.
"Suggests is more ambiguous" and "undermines the framing" are bare assertions you want to be true based entirely on your mental model that has several shaky unsupported axioms.
I would guess that anyone who describes that problem as "underspecified" has some kind of serious brain injury or is below A2 english proficiency and should be excluded from the dataset, but I would not assert that definitively as self-evident.
This is a not-unexpected result if you think of AI as what it actually is instead of what a multi-trillion dollar marketing campaign wants it to be.
At heart, the corpus for this going to be an aggregation of commentary from people in the undisputed most obese era in all of human history performatively denouncing and mocking an imagined other for using cars to go short distances and advocating for walking.
So you've got all "50 meters away? Of course you should walk!" vs a much, much smaller sliver of content about trick questions.
There is no reasoning here, there has never been any reasoning, there has been reasonable or less reasonable weighting for existing reasoning people already did that became part of training data.
If you take away the input corpus, you also take away the illusion of reasoning.
Whereas with other things that can reason like corvids, or ants or octopodes or slime molds, they can derive novel solutions and do a bit of math without any answer key. Mathematics is pure reasoning without any interference and AI can't do it at all unless you provide it with a corpus of already accurate formulas.
> People kept saying humans would fail this too, so I got a human baseline through Rapidata (10k people, same forced choice): 71.5% said drive. Most models perform below that.
This really is a grasping at straws ad hoc rationalization for the outcome that is never going to die, and you can see the top comments are efforts to salvage it or cast doubt on the outcome.
If you work for or own a lot of stock in an AI company, I understand you can't understand what you're being paid not to understand. But if you're anyone else...
The instance owner has absolute anonymity and absolute power to snoop with no access logs and no known identity. CCPA? GDPR? Access controls? Good luck! You can leave the instance, but you're leaving all your data behind for them or any future owner of the instance to do whatever they want with... forever.
And even if you trust them and everyone they will ever meet, people can and do store their server logs unencrypted.
Then argue they can't help it and you don't "get it" because that's just how the architecture has to work in order to... well it's not clear why this is a good design for the user or any better than other social media.
1) You still don't own your data
2) You still don't have any privacy
3) Every single part of the user experience is inferior or confusing and the people making it don't care because they're focused on doing what they can to connect kids with anonymous instance owners.
This looks interesting, but if you don't have creepy and opaque admin controls and algorthimic manipulation that create a thousand little tinpot Larry Ellisons, you should highlight that.
If your attitude is that if one person litters it's now ok for anyone else to dump on protected categories, it's your clubhouse and you can set the rules.
That's your right, and it's also my right to say that I don't want to be associated with this forum even indirectly.
Could you provide me with a good email address to send my CCPA request to delete all my data and comments and account? I sent emails to a few YC addresses with:
"I am writing to request that you delete my personal data from all of your paper and/or computer records pursuant to Section 1798.105 of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)
To the extent that you rely on consent to process my personal data, I withdraw that consent. To the extent that you rely on your 'legitimate interest' to process my personal data, I object to the processing as there are no overriding legitimate grounds.
If you are selling my personal data to third parties, please consider this email as my direction to you not to sell my personal data to third parties.
Please don’t ask me to perform a self-service process such as locating my information on your website, filling out a form, or providing a mobile advertising ID. These requests place an undue burden on my side.
If you are not able to comply with my request to delete all of my personal data, please advise as to the specific reason for which this request cannot be acted on. Please advise which sections and subsections of the law you are relying upon, and identify the specific reason for which you are relying on those exceptions, such as which legal obligation, or internal purpose or use. Please delete all my personal data which does not fall under these exceptions."
I have not received a response.
I can write again in 46 days with a complaint attached mentioning you personally and a letter from my state representative indicating they'd like to know more as well. Or you can resolve this quickly in a mutually amicable way by just deleting my account and all my comments.