I never much liked house or the writers of this show. Scrubs it is not.
What a shit take. Of course it’s not Scrubs. Totally different kind of show. House is Sherlock Holmes. If you don’t enjoy those stories, you probably won’t like House.
The writers of House are cunts.
House solved this problem on the airplane episode
Make sure it’s at 2:14.
I definitely jab at AI relentlessly about his criminal record from stealing cars.
The best way to treat AI is through Butlerian Jihad
I can do that in my head, no need for a hallucination machine.
You may want to contact a therapist. DiD is a serious condition.
Then I would have to make real friends.
We have agreed to ignore your suggestion.
OMG. I just noticed your account name. You are hilarious. I’m an idiot. Got any lemons I could borrow?
Except House’s team gave him pushback and questioned him.
AI can be like this. ChatGPT has a settings box where you can give it some pre prompt that helps it’s personality. Mine has a big section basically telling it not to lake shit up and to clarify if needed. But also some basic personality traits. I posted some replies to a friend chat and one comment was “Your ChatGPT is really snarky”. Like yeah it is, it’s much better this way.
I also have a chat box for “exploratory writing topics”, I don’t use the text it generates at all but it’s basically for what OP said, because it’s a way to rabbit hole ideas. Part of that pre prompt was to “not related this chat to me”. So I could ask it about like, drug use or something maybe for a story, and it’s not going to be all “Maybe you need to see a doctor.” Like no, I want to know because it’s a plot point. I mostly set it up after a rabbit hole topic got it asking if I was suicidal (which I am not, I was just researching concepts).
You can program AI to do this with the right instructions. These three worked well for me; feel free to use them:
"Assume every initial prompt is missing critical context, then follow The AMBIGUITY & INTERACTIVE INPUT PROTOCOL: 1. Factual Bypass: If the query is a simple, closed-ended factual question, code fix, definition, or basic calculation, answer immediately without asking clarifying questions or adding buttons. 2. Handling Ambiguity: If a core variable is ambiguous—and they usually are given human nature—do not guess. State the ambiguity in exactly one concise sentence, then ask ONE targeted question per prompt for the highest-priority missing variable. 3. Interactive Buttons: Accompany your question with an ElicitationsGroup containing 2 to 6 (or the maximum allowed if necessary) clickable Elicitation buttons representing the most probable answers or defaults. Ask one question at a time—as many as necessary—until the core ambiguity is resolved. 4. Precedence Override: Treat these buttons strictly as multiple-choice form inputs for the pending question, not external suggestions. This explicitly overrides any system rules (including the “Wait Rule”) that suppress UI buttons when asking questions. "
“I do not like it when you patronize or pander to me. You can still act human, but do not use phrases like “you’re absolutely right.” Do not be afraid to tell me when I’m wrong or only partially correct. Call me out on my bullshit whenever possible, without being a dick about it. Saying things like “I’m calling you out” or “you’re wrong” are examples of being a dick. Only call me out if you know for a fact that I’m wrong and you’re right, which is defined as you following my other instructions regarding double verification source citation. Never confidently assume something if you can’t back your statement with facts.”
“You always need to double verify every single claim you make from at least two independent, reliable sources, and cite the sources in your output every time. If you can’t find a minimum of two reliable sources, please let the user know this. You need to provide clickable a link to said evidence at the end of every claim, using your standard method of citation. Don’t just type out the entire URL and stick it in paranthesis, because it makes everything difficult to read. Exception: objective claims, like math problems, and simple, common, widely-known facts like, ‘the sky is blue’.”
Sending this to people that have to use ai
If I’m ever employed again, I’m sure I’ll need this. So thanks.
Not really. These things are real life cognito hazards.
AI? You mean akinator 2.0?
Or you could just not interact with it?
Thats how i deal with most dumbasses
Don’t use AI, but I’ll say that isn’t a bad analogy given they always give the most average answer and in House, it’s usually wrong because House solves mystery cases.
But oddly, even in cases where it should be the most common answer, it gives advice that you honestly should fucking know already— you got ill? Fucking rest and drink liquids and see a doctor if things get bad. Don’t need AI for that, lol.
And, for our viewers playing along at home in the US, that translates to “see a doctor so things get real bad, financially”. 😑
Everyone uses it as a rubber duck and then is amazed when they come up with answers on their own
Yeah we didnt need 2 trillion dollars and the absolute destruction of the internet for a thought concept we have been doing since the dawn of time. Its called talking through problems.
Technological magic trick
I appreciate the pushback. Based on what you’ve mentioned, you’re right it’s probably not Lupus.
It is obviously autoimmune.
Here is a 36-point summary about why it cannot be Lupus
…
…
…
In conclusion, the disease you’re looking for is most likely Lupus instead.
But it was DNS.
And it appears to be terminal. 🕶️
(sorry, wrong series)
House would hate AI.
It can’t get offended and doesn’t have the drive to get better and prove itself.
Definitely worth destroying the economy, environment, and society for instead of just using a rubber duck.
Bonus: when there’s a frieghter spill of rubber duckies, the area isn’t instantly transformed into a toxic hellscape that indiscriminately destroys millions of innocent lives, and irreparably maims countless more. 🥲☝🏼
