Not going to argue with you about it here

This has all been ridiculous.

Have a good one.

Not an excuse.

Not going to argue with you about it here, but the short is: if that’s true, when I messaged you, you should have just had a conversation with me about it instead of all of this.

Have a good one.

Well thanks for understanding. The question itself was not a problem, hopefully that helps as well.

Because as the mod that removed the post, I’d like to give you my perspective if you’ll let me.

• OP made a post that seemed to break rule 5 (we had multiple reports on it), and did not seem like a good-faith question breaking rule 1, so I removed the post
• OP then makes a second post being fairly passive towards me, further showing that they were not posting in good-faith. So once again, removed the post for rule 1 and 5, messaged OP as well explaining this. This could have been a temp ban, I was being nice here, and reaching out to give OP the chance to explain they were not posting in bad faith.
• OP then posts 13 times about the above in other communities, breaking some of the rules in those communities.

As mods it’s mayhem if you don’t enforce your rules, which is all I was trying to do, we have each rule to keep the community from getting out of control and offtopic. If we had no rules, the community would be filled with a bunch of trolls and offtopic posts.

IMO OP has proved multiple times now that their question was not in good-faith, and they were seeking out arguments (check their other comments) and drama (see the 13 posts).

Icing on the cake: we left their rephrased question up to avoid more of this drama, OP still kept posting the screenshots.

Just want to make sure I understand, you blocked a community because they removed a post that broke their rules?

Thank you for understanding

censored

censored

Those sentences are obviously not being excellent to other commenters here. To avoid a ban (you have broken this rule twice, I’m being lenient) please follow rule 3.

Thanks

Your comment was removed for violating rule 3.

Whoops! We’ll get those back shortly, thank you!

My experience has been very different, I do have to sometimes add to what it summarized though. The Bsky account mentioned is a good example, most of the posts are very well summarized, but every now and then there will be one that isn’t as accurate.

Most of what I’m asking it are things I have a general idea of, and AI has the capability of making short explanations of complex things. So typically it’s easy to spot a hallucination, but the pieces that I don’t already know are easy to Google to verify.

Basically I can get a shorter response to get the same outcome, and validate those small pieces which saves a lot of time (I no longer have to read a 100 page white paper, instead a few paragraphs and then verify small bits)

Yes, I’m saving time. As I mentioned in my other comment:

Yeah, normally my “Make this sound better” or “summarize this for me” is a longer wall of text that I want to simplify, I was trying to keep my examples short.

And

and helps correct my shitty grammar at times.

And

Hallucinations are a thing, so validating what it spits out is definitely needed.

Yeah, normally my “Make this sound better” or “summarize this for me” is a longer wall of text that I want to simplify, I was trying to keep my examples short. Talking to non-technical people about a technical issue is not the easiest for me, AI has helped me dumb it down when sending an email, and helps correct my shitty grammar at times.

As for accuracy, you review what it gives you, you don’t just copy and send it without review. Also you will have to tweak some pieces that it gives out where it doesn’t make the most sense, such as if it uses wording you wouldn’t typically use. It is fairly accurate though in my use-cases.

Hallucinations are a thing, so validating what it spits out is definitely needed.

Another example: if you feel your email is too stern or gives the wrong tone, I’ve used it for that as well. “Make this sound more relaxed: well maybe if you didn’t turn off the fucking server we wouldn’t of had this outage!” (Just a silly example)

Writing customer/company-wide emails is a good example. “Make this sound better: we’re aware of the outage at Site A, we are working as quick as possible to get things back online”

Dumbing down technical information “word this so a non-technical person can understand: our DHCP scope filled up and there were no more addresses available for Site A, which caused the temporary outage for some users”

Another is feeding it an article and asking for a summary, https://hackingne.ws/ does that for its Bsky posts.

Coding is another good example, “write me a Python script that moves all files in /mydir to /newdir”

Asking for it to summarize a theory or protocol, “explain to me why RIP was replaced with RIPv2, and what problems people have had since with RIPv2”

And you’re entitled to that opinion my friend, lets have a good day.

They are very different. One is hostile (not excellent), the other is an opinion.

Thanks for pointing out the typo.

Sorry you feel that way!

Saying someone is lying and telling someone to “fuck off” are not the same, one breaks rule 3 and the other does not.