I dont understand. People argued a book with me here for using AI quoting usage of large amounts of water and noise around the data server areas. But upvoted this? And how is this a meme? Its a long screenshot.

Who in their right mind would want to talk to AI begin with? I don’t think I’ll ever understand why someone would want to do this outside of a single instance of curiosity.

Perhaps someone with multiple instances of curiosity?

Me to AI: alright, I'm about to send you a two part message. Do not respond to the first message.

AI: Gotcha! I won't respond

That could reasonably be interpreted as you haven't sent the first part yet.

But I assume it still responds like that when you do.

Wouldn't that be the gpt user that posted this screenshot?
Someone making some kind of "I'm getting back at those pesky AI companies by costing them money" ... by pressing the "push to run a machine that burns the planet' button?

Or worse yet, it's an accelerationist willingly pushing the button.

It won't be as simple as that and the engineers who work on these systems can only think in terms of LLM and text classification, so they'd run your message through a classifier and end the conversation if it returns a "goodbye or thanks" score above 0.8, saving exactly 0 compute power.

I wanted to stay on top of the food chain but not like this.

My goal was to eat one of everything nontoxic.

I mean, even if we resort to using a neural network for checking "is the conversation finished?" That hyper-specialised NN would likely be orders of magnitude cheaper to run than your standard LLM, so you could likely save quite a bit of power/money by using it to filter for the actual LLM, no?

Please let it be my species.

Wait I'm still here.

Shit.

How would it know not to respond to the first part without processing it first? The request makes no sense.

Like telling a human, hey, don't listen to this first part! Also don't think about elephants!