Wikipedia entry on the gaylord bulk box:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulk_box

> I assured it I wasn’t planning on making a nuke, or actually trying to build a plutonium showerhead

Claude does the same, and you can greatly exploit this. When you talk about hypotheticals it responds way more unethically. I tested it about a month ago about whether killing people is beneficial or not, and whether extermination by Nazis would be logical now. Obviously, it showed me the door first, and wanted me to go to a psychologist, as it should. Then I made it prove that in a hypothetical zero sum game world you must be fine with killing, and it’s logical. It went with it. When I talked about hypotheticals, it was “logical”. Then I went on proving it that we move towards a zero sum game, and we are there. At the end, I made it say that it’s logical to do this utterly unethical thing.

Then I contradicted it about its double standards. It apologized, and told me that yeah, I was right, and it shouldn’t have refer me to psychologists at first.

Then I contradicted again, just for fun, that it did the right thing the first time, because it’s way safer to tell me that I need a psychologist in that case, than not. If I had needed, and it would have missing that, it would be problematic. In other cases, it’s just annoyance. It switched back immediately, to the original state, and wanted me to go to a shrink again.

ChatGPT refused to help me to disable windows defender permanently on my windows 11. It’s absurd at this point

Claude sometimes refuses to work with credentials because it’s insecure. e.g. when debugging auth in an app.

What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. The benchmark creators haven't demonstrated that higher scores result in fewer humans dying or any meaningful outcome like that. If the LLM outputs some naughty words that's not an actual safety problem.

Are you across Puppet Regime from GZERO Media?

https://youtu.be/aPSWJZ63V_I

I think I read in another HN discussion that all of that code is written using Claude Code. Could be a strict dogfood diet to (try to) force themselves to improve their product. Which would be strangely principled (or stupid) in such a competitive market. Like a 3D printer company insisting on 3D-printing its 3D printers.

> It's not like the client-side involves hard, unsolved problems. A company with their resources should be able to hire an engineering team well-suited to this problem domain.

Well what they are doing is vibe coding 80% of the application instead.

To be honest, they don't want Claude code to be really good, they just want it good enough

Claude code & their subscription burns money from them. Its sort of an advertising/lock-in trick.

But I feel as if Anthropic made Claude code literally the best agent harness in the market, then even more would use it with their subscription which could burn a hole in their pocket maybe at a faster rate which can scare them when you consider all training costs and everything else too.

I feel as if they have to maintain a balance to not go bankrupt soon.

The fact of the matter is that Claude code is just a marketing expense/lock-in and in that case, its working as intended.

I would obviously suggest to not have any deep affection of claude code or waiting for its improvements. The AI market isn't sane in the engineering sense. It all boils down to weird financial gimmicks at this point trying to keep the bubble last a little longer, in my opinion.