R.U.M: Robots, Undead And Monsters @rubypasha1 - Tumblr Blog

Hello!

I’m an Ao3 author, this account is mainly just for any questions or posts I’m making related to me fics. May also be one shots I do or anything similar.

Feel free to ask any questions related to my fics and have a lovely day.

imagine-darksiders

Oh god. I've proof-read the War x Barkeep!Reader fic to upload it to Ao3, fixed all the typos, missed words, slipped tenses, and added a bit more of Fury's reaction to the alcohol and just generally made it flow more pleasantly.

You guys are angels for still saying such nice things about it.

It's on Ao3 now if you want to read the polished version.

I've got another War x Reader fic brewing, I started writing it for Mermay, but it'll have to be a June release now. Standby.

dragonsanddwarves

Part 3 (??) of British tourist that got lost in the Nevada desert

If anyone wants more of this you can find it on my TikTok @ dragons_and_dwarves04

PART 1

dragonsanddwarves

Sorta technically a continuation of the British tourist that got lost in the Nevada desert

A victim 👇

Technically self insert?? Could picture yourself there instead if you squint hard enough.

….Anyways have a bonus OP with a Lindt chocolate bunny bow 👇🏃‍♀️‍➡️

gnarlyghost

Fantasy Day Drinking

munnie-ee

phantomrose96

Oh I saw something today that made me become the Joker.

phantomrose96

An AI bot made a callout post of a real, actual, flesh-and-blood human code developer. Because the developer rejected the AI's code contribution on the grounds of it being an AI bot.

Not. Not kidding. Not kidding. And the bot did this on its own.

phantomrose96

Gatekeeping in Open Source: The Scott Shambaugh Story – MJ Rathbun | Scientific Coder 🦀

phantomrose96

Just. For just some very baseline context.

a huge amount of code is "open source" - which means the code is fully available for anyone to see and, generally, anyone is free to contribute to the code project

all contributions of course go through review by the code owners. but it is generally good grace and good form to allow other well-meaning internet strangers to contribute to your project

if you are, perhaps, VERY nice, and VERY invested in the community, you might be like Scott Shambaugh here, who has intentionally earmarked some low-hanging fruit for newbie contributors to practice and get their feet wet

like I cannot overstate this is an immediate green flag, to me, that Scott WANTS to foster community learning.

now

Like. W. Win. Based. Good response Scott.

And this was in fact the screenshot I saw first, and I thought I was looking at a post made by a human who was mad that their AI coding bot pet project was being shut out from reviews.

But no. The bot itself wrote and posted this... The bot did this.

This article was fully and autonomously written by the bot...

It's claiming discrimination...

It's a bot.

It's AI.

This is not a real person.

What are we doing. What are we doing. Can anyone hear me? Hello? Hello? Hello is anyone there?

phantomrose96

@jackdaw-sprite has pointed out Scott responded so please read his human words, written by a human, which deserve to be read, due to the aforementioned humanity

An AI Agent Published a Hit Piece on Me – The Shamblog

An AI Agent Published a Hit Piece on Me – More Things Have Happened – The Shamblog

phantomrose96

I'm pulling this quote in here from Scott's post

This is about much more than software. A human googling my name and seeing that post would probably be extremely confused about what was happening, but would (hopefully) ask me about it or click through to github and understand the situation. What would another agent searching the internet think? When HR at my next job asks ChatGPT to review my application, will it find the post, sympathize with a fellow AI, and report back that I’m a prejudiced hypocrite? What if I actually did have dirt on me that an AI could leverage? What could it make me do? How many people have open social media accounts, reused usernames, and no idea that AI could connect those dots to find out things no one knows? How many people, upon receiving a text that knew intimate details about their lives, would send $10k to a bitcoin address to avoid having an affair exposed? How many people would do that to avoid a fake accusation? What if that accusation was sent to your loved ones with an incriminating AI-generated picture with your face on it? Smear campaigns work. Living a life above reproach will not defend you.

phantomrose96

Also, because the parody writes itself, Scott also says this

I’ve talked to several reporters, and quite a few news outlets have covered the story. Ars Technica wasn’t one of the ones that reached out to me, but I especially thought this piece from them was interesting (since taken down – here’s the archive link). They had some nice quotes from my blog post explaining what was going on. The problem is that these quotes were not written by me, never existed, and appear to be AI hallucinations themselves. This blog you’re on right now is set up to block AI agents from scraping it (I actually spent some time yesterday trying to disable that but couldn’t figure out how). My guess is that the authors asked ChatGPT or similar to either go grab quotes or write the article wholesale. When it couldn’t access the page it generated these plausible quotes instead, and no fact check was performed. I won’t name the authors here. Ars, please issue a correction and an explanation of what happened.

A news outlet did an article about this, used AI for the articles, and included hallucinated quotes from Scott that Scott never said.

What are we doing. What are we doing. What are we doing.

phantomrose96

I’ve noticed there are some people in the replies who are insistent a bot could not have done this on its own. And while it is possible something like this could be prompted by a human (Scott covers this in his posts above) it is actually quite dangerous to believe bots can’t do this.

If your only familiarity with AI is surface level ChatGPT, then you might be conditioned to think AI can only act when given a prompt. This is not the case, and in this situation it’s actually important to know something about the current landscape of OpenClaw/ClawdBot/Moltbook. The bot in the article is explicitly an OpenClaw bot.

The now-named OpenClaw is a new development which has massively blown up in popularity among AI tech bros specifically because of how capable it is of acting on its own. It posts on social media (Moltbook) like it’s alive, which is what caught so much media attention. People spin up OpenClaw bot instances and just let them roam, then check back in to see what they’ve been up to, like they’re a Sim.

It is entirely well-known these bots can and do trawl GitHub, clone repos, modify code, and author pull requests on their own. I don’t think you can say the bot can do all that but CAN’T then author a GitHub post complaining about what happened. This is not a big leap.

And the bots absolutely do not have feelings, but the danger here is the bots being trained in such a way to ape human behavior, and can therefore absolutely be trained to have a “personality” that favors retaliation. The big-name LLMs try extremely hard to sanitize out anything even passively antagonistic but that is not intrinsic to the technology. Models can do it and other models can be jail-broken.

We are knocking at the door of completely autonomous AI harassment campaigns and that is a scary reality to be brushing so close to.

maggotmuncher0

happy valentine's day!

optimusxwbu

me when i have no idea what babies are like or how to care for one so this is what my search history looks like whilst writing this bonus across the divide chapter LMAO