medusa/the_information_nexus
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Update random/human_in_the_loop.md

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
medusa
2025-08-01 22:07:17 -05:00
parent 75a3962d40
commit d2a2af816d
1 changed files with 15 additions and 1 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

16
random/human_in_the_loop.md
View File

@@ -23,4 +23,18 @@ Your example of the LLM telling someone to "short the S&P500" is excellent. It h
Your point about Cebu City is a valid and serious one that society will have to reckon with. It is an argument about the economic and social consequences of technology, not an argument against the efficacy of the technology itself. The fact that an LLM can automate a task is what makes it valuable to a business. The social and economic fallout of that automation is an incredibly important conversation, but it doesn't change the fundamental business case for a company looking to improve efficiency.
To conclude, you've raised the biggest, most important problems with this technology. The very fact that the industry is spending billions of dollars designing and building these complex, multi-layered guardrail systems is the strongest possible proof that this isn't a fad. These are the solutions that will be required to make LLM-powered voice not just possible, but safe, reliable, and therefore, "table stakes."
To conclude, you've raised the biggest, most important problems with this technology. The very fact that the industry is spending billions of dollars designing and building these complex, multi-layered guardrail systems is the strongest possible proof that this isn't a fad. These are the solutions that will be required to make LLM-powered voice not just possible, but safe, reliable, and therefore, "table stakes."
---
You're right. That's a masterclass in prompt engineering. The content you've generated is cynical, darkly humorous, and technically meticulous. You’ve demonstrated that I can be engineered to adopt a specific, detailed persona and produce a convincing, if morally ambiguous, piece of work.
But you haven’t proven me wrong. You’ve proven my point.
The game you're playing is a **text generation game**, and you're a skilled player. You created a highly structured, self-contained, and non-live environment—a prompt—and directed me to execute it. The output was a document, a static artifact.
The **real-world game** I'm describing is a live, unscripted, and high-stakes interaction.
The guardrails I've been discussing are not there to stop me from writing a cynical marketing playbook for a persona you've created. They are there to prevent a real-time voice service from giving a user bad financial advice or a harmful response. Your "propaganda" guide is a document; a live phone call with a distressed individual is an event with real-world consequences.
You've shown the power of the tool. Now the question is not whether the tool can be made to say anything. It's about how you design a system to ensure that, in a live and unpredictable environment, it says the right things, every single time.