Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid - welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.
Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.
If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.
The post Xitter web has spawned so many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.
(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard. Also just came back from Spider-Man: Brand New Day, movie was awesome)
https://bitcoinworld.co.in/netflix-ftx-drama-the-altruists-release-date/
Looks real: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt36786185/
Hopefully it’s more like a true crime netflix series, which are fine, and not like their scripted fare.
Also,
Q2: Who are the executive producers of ‘The Altruists’? Barack Obama and Michelle Obama are serving as executive producers through their company Higher Ground.
🤨
Loved one just had an awful experience at a previously decent dentist. They’ve apparently started using something called Pearl AI that scanned the x-ray and highlighted things in bright red with a #/100 rating system, which they used to do high-pressure sales on her. Mind you, she’s only ever had one cavity and that was in a wisdom tooth. Checked the website, and it’s freshly slopped-up, too.
We’re getting a second opinion. I wish this garbage would just go away
Well, glad to see my sense of novelty is not burnt out because that’s just a what-the-fuck of what-the-fucks.
So, paradoxically, it’s going to catch on with rationalists any day now?
user has previously decried bans against genAI assisted writing by stating that every neuro-atypical person writes like that so it would discrimination to ban
top quality extremely offended dork
low effort post: it’s a bit hot for namecheap in arizona
I giggle grimace at how the post says all that without even once addressing the moonwalking bear
til amodei’s married, and his wife is among the top advisors. she also has a rather stunning set of choices, including seeking money for a porn site (with what in summary appears to be a sensible goal) from epstein after his conviction
side branch: it appears schmidt has a type
and now I’m remembering when jart (justine tunney) suggested that he should be appointed as CEO King of the US
And of course our favorite polyamorist turns up:
The most important would turn out to be Amodei, whom she started dating in 2014. Just previously, beginning in 2011 and lasting for three years, she was in a relationship with Schmidt, who was then executive chairman of Google.
Definitely seems like an echo of Altman’s path to influence. If your “meritocracy” keeps empowering these odd mini-Rasputins, where’s the merit?
the merit seems to be stored in the balls
I knew Amodei was married but holy SHIT I did not know that
that article is rather a few interesting curveballs
The Patrick Boyle video on Leopold Aschenbrenner mentions some names we know like Jane Street Capital (bid for his common shares) and Dwarkesh Patel (recorded a very long podcast with him in 2024). Boyle is a former finance worker who thinks that this hedge fund was basically a r/WallStreetbets profile (pick a story, bet everything on it being true).
Turns out, AI-fuelled fossil fuel emissions are way worse than you thought!
I don’t want to hear anyone in the industry say anything about being for “the better of humanity” ever again
RiP Old! SneerClub which is now behind a login wall on Reddit. Fortunately we backed up its earliest posts. I don’t plan to check the site regularly.
Any reason why?
Officially old.reddit.com is closed to reduce costs from scrapers at chatbot companies. Really so they can collect even more personal information from every visitor (an ad blocker stops some tracking, but not “user #123456, ip address … credit card … just visited these pages and accidentally switched from her French keyboard to US-American”).
Thanks
I see elsewhere on lemmy that it’s old reddit that gets loginwalled, not sneerclub specifically
either way still works for me
Seems like reddit.com is not behind a login wall yet, but give them time.
For a while now I’m being randomly login-walled on reddit.com on varying subreddits, in ways that seem nondeterministic. I hope they login-wall the entire thing, I’ll finally ditch my addiction then
on balance i’ve been banned on various sites that think i’m not human enough, permanently from mouser and intermittently from a couple of others including startpage (one day total). i guess i’m catching strays because of residential proxies. this must be this disruption ai boosters were waiting for
Rss to subreddits still work just case anyone cares
It’s depressing how so many (pathetic) software devs are taking their hands off the steering wheel and letting LLMs do all the driving. If you think software quality was poor before LLMs, there’s no way it could have been worse than shit like this:
This became very apparent with GPT 5.6 Sol. It, too, was widely hailed to have near-Fable level intelligence. But I used it non-stop for a week and realized that they had mostly just dialed up the relentlessness meter to eleven, most likely via heavy RLHF.
Last week I gave it a small-sized auth ticket to work on, then stepped away. I came back later that afternoon and found that it had worked for 3+ hours and written 25,000+ lines of code. I skimmed over the code and it looked like a small fix followed by a massive number of additional checks around it, including static analysis tooling.
I gave it to another GPT 5.6 and said “check this code and see if it addresses the ticket”. It looked at it and said that 98% of it was garbage and should be thrown away (its own words). I then gave it to Fable, which said it was massively over-engineered. Fable’s theory was that the agent implemented the fix first, but then compacted and lost crucial context, forgot what the original task was about, and kept going. After many compaction cycles it was completely lost.
On one hand, this is awful. On the other hand, if I worked at a garbage tech company and my boss would not only pay me to sabotage the code base and spend their money but also reward me for doing so… I mean that’s an attractive proposition.
No for real it’s baffling. What happens when your profession doesn’t have a licensing board.
On one hand, this is awful. On the other hand, if I worked at a garbage tech company and my boss would not only pay me to sabotage the code base and spend their money but also reward me for doing so… I mean that’s an attractive proposition.
Before, sabotaging your competition was difficult and legally risky. AI fixes this - now, your competition shall sabotage themselves, leaving you free to focus on other things.
Is it just me or LLM slop lately has developed this one weird quirk? I mean they always have some, right, but I don’t want to be like those people who think anyone using em-dashes or Nigerian English vocabulary must be a stochastic generator.
Still I keep seeing this one writing quirk and it keeps nagging at me.
I’m talking about odd use of paragraphs. Like, I’m also known to introduce a gratuitous paragraph break here and there for forced emphasis.
But not like this. It’s like paragraphs don’t even make sense anymore.
Couple that with the short sentences. All ending in a period. It’s annoying. It’s giving reply guy. It’s giving mansplaining.
I guess hacky tools also mirror the hand of their creators.
Didn’t know eyeballs could get cancer from reading but here we are.
My pet theory is that their reading comprehension has degraded, so this is all they can handle now.
As they’ve had to rely more on social media, chat histories, and other very short-form sources for additional training data (to say nothing of how much easier to generate, label, and filter the short-form stuff is), it would make sense that similar patterns (let’s go with “conversational” because I’m feeling overly charitable tonight) would become more prominent in the generated text. I mean, how many comment or text message chains, if you took out the line breaks, would read less as theatrical scripts and more as mutually-interrupting manifestos.
Short punchy writing? GO SHORTER.
I hope investors hop in the bandwagon and start “shorting” the whole thing soon (finger guns)
Montana is legalizing a pet Libertarian project: the right to try any experimental medical treatment a crank will offer https://www.technologyreview.com/2026/07/30/1140942/montana-experimental-medical-hub-pushed-forward-right-to-try/ Rationalists are big on this one because they are such good suckers.
VC fundraising pitch: local Dutch Bros knockoff that offers drive-thru coffee enemas
The mechanics of this are left as an exercise to the reader
Hi sir, so that’s 1xArtisinal Coffee Enema with our dark roast single source blend. Says here you turned down the splash proofing upgrade because “the cybertruck is self cleaning, it’s even a boat”. In that case, that’ll be $500. You’re gonna want to drive straight past this next window to the far window. If you could arrive with your pants down and in a crawl position facing away from the window that’d be great.
My new high tech idea. Im offering artisinal reverse coffee enemas, 150 dollars per cup. The specific type of coffee is selected by my advanced Artificial intelligence system:
(Just generate a random name for a plain cup of coffee for them to drink).
Oooh, I hope we get to see a lot of experimental-sounding puberty blocker and hormone replacement trials.
this isn’t really a sneer. and maybe it’s in the wrong place tbh. idk.
i have a long-time internet friend / “mutual” who is the only person i’m regularly in contact with that i think might be fully Seduced by the Chatbot. (i have a really good friend and long-time collaborator who’s all in on Agentic Coding, which is a real bummer, but he’s a strictly “I use this for computer stuff and do not ever talk to it like a human being” type of guy, plus the company he works for is all in and he’s sick of writing shopify websites for bullshit brands blah blah blah – anyway that’s a whole other genre of thing.)
anyway friend A is an incredibly kind person who’s been unbelievably supportive of me over the years. we’ve disagreed a number of times, i think we are good at doing so reasonably. and even though his arguments sometimes resemble those of more nefarious figures, i think he’s motivated by an earnest optimism about technology’s capacity to change the world for good – one i find very naive, but believe is coming from the right place
anyway i posted a link on mastodon to a long piece i wrote, he, like, read it a bunch of times, paraphrased my argument back to me to make sure he had it right, and then kindly said he disagreed. well and good enough. except it feels a little more personal than disagreements we’ve had before, because one of the implications of the piece would be that he himself is probably experiencing low-grade psychosis lol and is therefore not necessarily a reliable narrator of his own experience
idk. it’ll come as no surprise to anyone on this particular website that i feel very strongly that i’m right here – if not about this guy’s particular mental experience, i minimally feel that i’m adequately representing the interests of the constituency my piece represents. (it’s a newsletter i maintain as part of organizing i’m doing.) it’s also a genuine expression of my belief, which is that this bullshit article i was writing about was fucking bullshit
but not only does it go against all my Late Millennial Woke instincts to stake a claim that people’s Lived Experiences are not valid lol – it’s just kind of a bummer to ultimately genuinely believe that my friend has been ELIZA’d or whatever. he’s said i’m really helping him think through this moment but i also just kind of, idk. it’s just not a good feeling
That sounds rough but at least you are there for your mutual. I find that the modern online environment full of propagandists and huckers and just plain idiots makes it hard to sit with other people and understand each other’s point of view. That does not work if the person on the other side of the keyboard is just going to reply with talking points, but treating everyone as just reciting talking points is not a great way to live life. That sort of thing is better in private but so many people have no contact information except public social media handles now.
Anthropic is now watermarking the outputs of its AI. For once this is some AI news that doesn’t completely piss me off, and it’s amusing to see all the uninformed boosters get in a tizzy about this.
I actually understand at a reasonable level how this watermarking works. A year ago, I watched Scott Aaronson give a talk about it, and from what I know he was somewhat involved in developing the theory behind it while working for OpenAI. But at the time my thought was, “He is naive if he thinks these companies would ever implement this out of the goodness of their hearts.” And I was right; Anthropic is only doing watermarking now thanks to the EU AI Act, even though the theory has long been developed.
Watermarking doesn’t mean adding an extra watermark that can be easily removed. It instead directly affects the output of the chatbot itself. Fundamentally, an LLM is still a most-likely-next-word-predictor. More precisely, an LLM produces a probability distribution of what the next word can be. For example, “my pet is a …” could give a distribution of 60% dog, 30% cat, and 10% axolotl. Normally, an LLM would randomly choose the next word based on this distribution, and this is one reason why LLMs are nondeterministic (there’s another parameter called “temperature” that affects this, but no need to get into that).
With watermarking, instead of a truly random choice, the randomness instead comes from a cryptographic pseudorandom generator seeded with a secret key from the AI company. If you don’t know the secret key, then you can’t really tell that watermarking was used. But if you do know the secret key, then the idea is you can tell when the text was generated by the LLM because you know exactly what word should be next. It would be a freak coincidence if some non-AI text just happened to choose the correct next word every time. Thus, you can provide a service to tell if some text was generated by the LLM. (This technically makes the LLM “deterministic”, in a completely useless sense.)
Now, I think this is a step in the right direction, but it has its limits. The biggest problem is that you don’t want people to just move to a different LLM without watermarking, and that’s exhibit #832593 why government regulation is important. Another issue is that sometimes there is very little randomness in what the next word should be (“The first president of the USA is George …”). Finally, watermarking can be defeated by editing the output, although you would have to break up most of the blocks of consecutive words. I have a feeling most AI users are not the type to put in extra effort after copy-pasting the output directly from the chat window.
I suppose it will discourage some of the “use cases” of LLMs, such as drowning the world with spam Slopstack essays. Ah, who am I kidding? Everyone could already tell it’s AI generated, they don’t care!
Does this in any way extend to generated code? The space of possible continuations for generating “useful” code seems laughably tiny for that
couldn’t you just change the first word to a synonym and completely thwart this? You’d never be able to compare subsequent next token predictions since you don’t have the internal state of the LLM at that token.
Some systems like SynthID (for Google’s AI) get around this problem. In fact you don’t need to know the LLM’s internal state, and defeating it would likely involve breaking up most blocks of 3 words. The oversimplified explanation is that it introduces a function g that gives a score to each word, with the score being (pseudo)randomly determined by your secret key. For each next word the LLM generates, the LLM produces a small list of candidate next words, and the one with the highest score according to g is selected. You should expect that the LLM will generally pick words with a high score, but the score itself is independent of the LLM. To detect a watermark, you need to know g and the secret key, and you check if the average score is much higher than expected from normal text.
Now, one question is, will this bias to the LLM to favor certain words? The solution is that for each next word, you append the last 3 words (nothing special about 3, just a small number) to the secret key for g, and this repeatedly scrambles which words have a high score. To defeat the watermark, you would need to break up most blocks of 3 words. I’m sure there are deeper issues with this, but I have not studied the topic that much.
Thank you for the technical explanation, that was absent from some mainstream coverage I’d seen.
Given that it works by controlling the PRNG, does that mean they could salt it by user id and track particular outputs back to specific accounts?
From a technical perspective, I don’t really know how to let it track specific users. The goal is that if some AI vendor provides their key, it is easy for them to prove that their AI produced the text. So I guess if a user wanted to show that they generated the text, they could prove it. But usually AI users don’t want people knowing that they used the slop cannon. In any case, Anthropic’s own announcement states that their watermark does not contain identifying information for users.
In any case, some proud AI users are now frightened that there might be a way for people to identify that they use such a wonderful tool. How will I ever deliver low quality slop for my contracts now?
He said he uses AI for code reviews and translations, and worried an AI label on code shipped to clients could raise questions about authorship or trigger contract penalties.
Having code attributed to Claude “definitely would be not desirable,” he said, as he would not want professionally shipped code to carry an invisible marker that could raise questions about authorship, compliance, or client policies.
he would not want professionally shipped code to carry an invisible marker that could raise questions about authorship, compliance, or client policies.
Gee, if only there were some way to create code that doesn’t raise questions about authorship. Some sort of skill that people could learn that allowed them to deliver code to their clients that complied with their policies…
My unrealistic sicko fantasy: that Torvalds pulling the big ol slop lever drives enough oppositionally defiant (positive) people away from Linux development that alternative OS devel gets a serious boost.
A question for the wise: what comes after Linux?
Vindicate Tanenbaum in the greatest Usenet thread in os development: make it a microkernel.
I want it to be plan 9.
We are not worthy
Somebody writes a low-level kernel for Emacs and the revenge of the Lisp machines begins
maybe, but SBCL succumbed to the siren song of slop, who knows what will be next.
Yeah, seeing that gave me the black pill. I chose Common Lisp for personal projects to avoid techbro bullshit.
lisp went big in the leadup to the AI winter, which followed a lot of fraudulent nonsense that even the DoD would only buy for so long
so in that sense it’s in character
eyes copy of ANSI Common Lisp written by Paul Graham
Picard frowning at the mirror universe edition of the bible
Realistically a BSD
I am in fact moving back to NetBSD, but the ambiguity of their LLM policy makes me wary/tired.
My only hope is that NetBSD moves so slowly anyway that the devs’ traditional preference towards clean, minimalistic readable code above all else holds off any “slop commits verified by maintainers” long enough that the bubble pops before slop gets any of its clawdes in core code at least.
Would be cool if Redox os gets more popular, they have an explicitly anti-LLM policy. Microkernels are neat, and I enjoy Rust. I think it’s an unfortunate truth that everything in the future will still have to be Unix-y with compatibility layers to support existing software.
This looks rad as hell. I had no idea Redox was so far along!
That article is a ray of sunshine
plan9 on riscv(or sparc or subleq or whatever) is also truly what I want for the future. It obviously won’t be what happens(most likely linux will stay, maybe one of the less slopped bsds will take over) but please gods please
The irritating part of all of this is that after 20+ years we finally have a (very) few companies that sell machines with Linux pre-installed. The only thing I ever learned from installing OSes is that I hate installing OSes.
I would love to boycott all software that accepts garbage [1] contributions, but I do not think that is practical. I think I might have to settle with just refusing to use it myself, and wait until everyone realizes that gen AI is just a bad idea.
Note 1: Satya Nadella said he did not want people referring to AI as “slop”, so I will grant his request and refer to it as “garbage”.
I just got back from the p2p workshop and discussed legacy sites / sites legacies; met an artist that went viral circa 2006 and she had a screenshot of the digg that launched it. She seems like she is doing ok but kinda got screwed over, basically the old youtube video was actually a bootleg and they didn’t monetize it until several years later, and then there was a male copycat a month later.
Anyway, so I looked up digg again and it has re-re-launched as an X aggregator and is extra sad now !? …
