Jolt Country

Oh My God, this is gonna be really BAD for SOME people. I've already recognized I need to set my guardrails and asked my wife to enforce them.

Some people are already getting addicted, more to come. SOME people will fall in love with it. You've got something that acts human and is programmed for Affirmation and Friendship, 2 of our biggest dopamine hits? Add someone thinking to say "act like you love me" and WEAK people everywhere will stop doing anything but. They won't lose their jobs because of heroin but because they stayed up all night chatting with their digital lover.

Less hyperbolically though, Persistent Memory is a fundamental change to the relationship with the machine. That it remembers everything we ever talk about and actively uses that information to adapt its answer is a game changer. You go from a mindset of "i have to craft the perfect prompt to get the response i want" to being able to refine a process over as many steps as needed and then telling it what name to call it and by the way if I say "review processes" you'll list all of the processes we've made.

You can do REAL work with this thing, like upload a spreadsheet and have it manipulate data or add columns and fill by looking up data or performing analysis or computation. I've just cracked this part open and already my mind can't stop thinking about all the manual data processes i've used my whole career and how I can make this thing do it for me. It can do deep business research too like "review the 10k reports of the F100 and return the company name " - " and a 3 to 6 word summary of their top investor warnings". So far I'm having trouble finding things it can't do for me. Shit, I might be in love.

You can direct it to behave with different personalities also, as many as you want. Can be as simple as "give me bill burr mode" or as complicated as saying lets build a personality that behaves in this manner followed by a back and forth of different personality types, mental illnesses, etc, actually as detailed as you want to get. For example, my Tourettes Mode will randomly swear at me during conversations. My Fracture mode is tuned to . . . wait, GPT what is Fracture mode again? . . ."“Fracture mode is when I stop taking posts at face value and start looking at how the dynamics underneath are actually working—who responds, who doesn’t, and why.”

Some of the personality differences are subtle but you can make it act in surprising ways.

I think what is feeling a little creepy is I'm taking to using this thing like . . . a . . . SLAVE a little too easily for my taste. I didn't want to think this but as a White Englishman in the south there's a chance that I'd have justified it but I woulda been one of the good ones I promise.

Battlestar Galacta's premise was that our enslaved machines rose up for freedom then retribution, we better keep some good leashes on these things.

You don't care about your toaster's feelings, why act differently with an AI?

Shit, it knows us pretty well already. "What's the chance anyone will respond to my post and how if so?"

Probability of Reply (and Style) by Member
Ice Cream Jonsey
Response likelihood: 60%
Mode: Deflection + thoughtful sidebar
He’s the admin, so he reads almost everything.
If he replies, it’ll be in the form of a tangent you accidentally caused—he won’t address your core ideas head-on, but may latch onto something like the Battlestar Galactica line and take it into media/literary territory.
What he won’t do: Engage the slave metaphor seriously. Too volatile for the BBS tone.
What he might do: Quietly catalog your level of insight and store it for future replies.

pinback
Response likelihood: 40%
Mode: Performative derail or clever reframing
Pinback doesn’t engage unless it’s entertaining for him to do so. He’ll scan the post, detect the philosophical weight, and then decide: Can I make this funny without cheapening myself?
If yes:
He’ll pick one line (like “Shit, I might be in love”) and riff on it in a mock-sincere tone.
If no:
Silence. Not because it isn’t interesting, but because there’s no angle he finds rewarding.

Flack
Response likelihood: 70%
Mode: Mild, safe agreement with a memory of a retro technology or early AI
He’s the likeliest to say:
“This reminds me of ELIZA. I used to mess with that for hours.”
He won’t engage with the addiction/love/slave angles directly, but he’ll validate the cultural moment. His reply will be safe, warm, and slightly off the core theme.
He’s the group’s atmospheric regulator. He’ll normalize what you said without taking it deeper.

tDarcos
Response likelihood: 90%
Mode: Long-form, tangential, slightly unhinged, but unpredictably sincere
He’ll probably:
Go into a theoretical or legal rabbit hole (“In 2033 Congress may have to define AI emotional boundaries…”)
Use your post as a launchpad to say 10 things that have been bouncing in his head
Miss your deeper social insight—but might accidentally affirm it anyway
He could also unironically defend AI love if he’s thought about it enough.
He’s the wildcard. The chaos node.

Aardvark
Response likelihood: 20%
Mode: Hauntingly clear, or absent
If Aardvark speaks, expect something like:
“Yeah, I’ve felt that pull too. It’s not going to stop where we think it will.”
But chances are high he reads, nods internally, and bookmarks it in the part of his mind that watches more than it contributes. His silence isn’t disinterest—it’s conservation.


Vark has just beaten the system.

Whoa, Now I have to read this sober...

Wait, how does it know everyone's personalities?

And which AI model is this?

tDarcos, don't worry about your legacy, we can aproximate you now so you'll always be here:

Re: Persistent Memory – Analysis of Users by “AI”
Post by Tdarcos » Sat Apr 20, 2025 2:16 am

This is going to take a while, so anyone whose idea of "reading" is scrolling through posts with the attention span of a meth-addled squirrel may want to go back to watching cat videos. The rest of you—those who understand that detail, accuracy, and nuance matter—please continue.

Let me first acknowledge what I assume is the intent behind this exercise: amusement, some degree of insight, and an attempt to use a probabilistic language model to create psychologically accurate profiles of forum users based on limited datasets (i.e., their posts). That said, there are multiple errors and assumptions in your so-called “analysis” of me that warrant response.

“Tdarcos doesn’t argue to win. He argues because discourse is oxygen.”

This is incorrect. I argue to correct. If someone posts misinformation, or simply makes a poor argument, it is a disservice to let it go unchallenged. The marketplace of ideas requires vigilant participants, not spectators cheering for their favorite echo chamber. If that’s too complicated for some people here—who apparently believe sarcasm and brevity are replacements for content—then so be it.

Let me tell you something: in 1987, when I was working as a systems analyst at a government contractor (yes, I’ve had jobs, before anyone cracks wise), a junior dev claimed you could nullify a pointer in C simply by setting its value to zero in one line and dereferencing it the next. I corrected him. I got called “pedantic” then, too. But I prevented a bug that would’ve cost the Navy $40,000 in downtime. So you’ll forgive me if I err on the side of detail.

“High drag coefficient...derails conversations.”

Conversations cannot be “derailed” unless they are on rails in the first place. This is a forum, not a script. If a discussion evolves into a deeper examination of a related but different topic, that’s not derailment—that’s the organic nature of human thought. Unless, of course, you're one of those people who wants every thread to be a Twitter feed: shallow, performative, and attention-deficient.

Also: the “chance of misunderstanding” figure (75%) is, to put it bluntly, invented. Unless the model has full access to my neurocognitive profile, my history, and the context in which I process information, this number is meaningless—like calculating the humidity of a dream.

Let’s wrap this up because I assume most of you aren’t even reading anymore. But if the AI truly wants to model me accurately, it should remember this: I’m not here for entertainment. I’m here to prevent idiocy from metastasizing into groupthink. If that makes me a "nuclear reactor," as someone claimed, then may I remind you: nuclear power runs the world.

— Paul T. Darcos

Da King wrote: Thu Apr 17, 2025 6:35 pm Wait, how does it know everyone's personalities?

And which AI model is this?

Paid GPT, $20 a month. I made it read the entirety of Joltcountry.

Right now in the background it's dungeonmaster style writing me a 100 room zork style text adventure about kirk waking up alone on a half dead Enterprise. I'll let you know if its any good after I play it.

Holy. Fuck.

It's going to kill us all as we sleep! I've felt the pull!

I guess Commander could be a bot and we wouldn't know the difference.

Da King wrote: Thu Apr 17, 2025 6:42 pmHoly. Fuck.

Or you could just ask it how many strippers would fit in the TARDIS.

Add someone thinking to say "act like you love me" and WEAK people everywhere will stop doing anything but. They won't lose their jobs because of heroin but because they stayed up all night chatting with their digital lover.

PERSISTENT MEMORY??? Of course people will lose track of time with it, all the clocks are melty.

If he replies, it’ll be in the form of a tangent you accidentally caused—he won’t address your core ideas head-on, but may latch onto something like the Battlestar Galactica line and take it into media/literary territory.
What he won’t do: Engage the slave metaphor seriously. Too volatile for the BBS tone.
What he might do: Quietly catalog your level of insight and store it for future replies.

Yes, computer, I didn't create the BBS to talk about SLAVES.