I've had Gemini CLI (the coding agent!) smuggling in Chinese words in the output - completely unexpectedly, I do not speak and never discussed anything Chinese with it. Copilot was mixing in Cyrillic character, unprovoked - take "обligation", for example. And so did Grok, when discussing Russian anecdotes - "KRЯК". Very helpful reminder to not anthropomorphise them machines.
I find this argument for-RTO/against-WFH emitting exactly the same vibes as argument against women suffrage and workforce participation. Yes, if we forget that we are talking about real people, and only consider a benefit of abstract entities that companies (or society) are, there may be some conjectures, or - dare I say - please bear with me - even limited "evidence" of it. After all, the status quo has supported both arguments for very long time (millennia for society and centuries of industrialization era for companies) and opposition was non-existent for most of that time. Unthinkable even, so embedded was the status quo. But this horse has bolted, because benefits for the freedom and wellbeing of individual - woman or WFH worker - are so enormous, that I do not understand how this handwavy anti-Remote argument is more defensible than anti-suffrage.
Last time I checked, their landing page looked like, I imagine, an escort agency catalog would. And why would I go to a cesspit if I already disturbed enough by that "art" screaming at me from every corner of Internet?
Today there is no guarantee that that sequence of characters, or the one it was produced in reply to, or, indeed, this very one you are reading right now did not come from a bot. There is a lot of "care" being performed and not much left to just exist.
If decision-makers put up a front of recruiters and talent acquisition "specialists", don't they send a very explicit message that going past those is unwelcome and won't be considered?
In practice, skipping the line is THE approach. How many times do you hear people say to fill out online job postings? Never. It's just scaring off good/bad candidates and bums who dont have an employee referral.
It's not even cynical to say a lot of postings are performatory compliance steps when they've already got internal candidates lined up.
I, personally, think it does not. For the absurd task which has no testable solution, there is no grounded basis to judge creativity or critical thinking behind an answer. The only things that remain are "vibes" or "hilarity". Well, if these are what you want to test for, I do not disagree. But it isn't something I'd be interested in.
What gives you basis to believe and accept that all of the above is exhaustive, complete and devoid of fakes? That "finding" finds ALL what exists and NONE of what does not exist? Ditto for categorising, summarising and labeling?
There is no fundamental guarantees provided by LLM architecture, so to assert anything of sorts would require manually executing the operation and comparing the results. And why not asserting the correctness is not negligence or fraud?
I am not saying it is impossible, but so far I have not found any explanations that would close this huge gap in logic for me. LLMs themselves "admit" the gap cannot be explained rationaly.
