共感で繋がるSNS

人気

関連検索ワード

新着

いぬひこ

いぬひこ

本気で、自作AIエージェントを作ることにした。
☕🚃 週末前の朝に、決めた。


流行ってるからでも、
PoCで終わらせたいからでもなくて。

ちゃんと 使われる前提で、
ちゃんと 責任を持てる形で、
人の仕事の横に立てるAIを作りたくなった。

ナレッジは意味として持たせて、
制御は人が握って、
判断はAIが補助する。

派手じゃないけど、
現場で生き残るやつ。

まだ途中。
でももう、引き返さないって決めた朝。

電車を待ちながら、
静かにスイッチ入れただけ。
それで十分。

This morning, I decided to seriously build my own AI agent.
Not for hype. Not for demos.
But for real use—next to real people, doing real work.

It’s still a work in progress.
But the direction is locked in.

#関係的ASMR 🤍
#AIart 🎨
#AIエージェント
#RAG
#自作AI
#金曜日の決意
#通勤中思考
ひとりごとの星ひとりごとの星
GRAVITY3
GRAVITY10
LAIKA 🌹

LAIKA 🌹

In Japan, it's the House of Representatives election.
Well, the Prime Minister was recently decided.
What exactly are you doing?

There is time to wander
Is it okay Japan?
Trump is weird too
Is it the same in Japan?

What is politics without the people?
I'll get the answer someday.

日本では衆議院選挙なんだ
えーこの前総理が決まったのでは
いったいなにをやっているのか。

迷走するにも程がある
大丈夫日本?
トランプもおかしいけど
日本も同じかな

国民不在の政治なんて
いつか答えが出るな。
GRAVITY11
GRAVITY83
ダン

ダン

トランプがノルウェーの首相に送ったメールより(Google翻訳 / オリジナル英文の順に掲載)
もはや妄想にとりつかれているとしか思えない。

「貴国が、8つの戦争を阻止したにもかかわらず、私にノーベル平和賞を授与しないことを決定したことを考えると、私はもはや、純粋に平和について考える義務を感じません。しかし、平和は常に優先されるべきであり、グリーンランドを完全に支配しない限り、世界は安全ではありません。」

Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feeI an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant unding,
The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland.
GRAVITY
GRAVITY2
鮟鱇

鮟鱇

After my long battle with Red Dogs,
I am now wounded to the bone, and since my life is not going to last much longer,
I've decided to leave my personal history here.
🔴My personal history or A testament to the future.🔴
www2.tba.t-com.ne.jp/a-z/Jibunsi.txt
062🌙1768676350
GRAVITY
GRAVITY
ジュデイ㍿l🤍❤️🤍♾️

ジュデイ㍿l🤍❤️🤍♾️

Real love isn't decided in the easy moments

it's revealed in the hard ones.

When silence feels sharp.

When distance tests your resolve

When misunderstanding tries to pull you apart.

and you still reach for each other.



That's not coincidence.@the.carázon
That's commitment.


That's choosing each other anyway.🩷💙🩷💙
GRAVITY

You're Still the One

シャナイア・トゥエイン

GRAVITY
GRAVITY9
プリン

プリン

chatGPTへの提言文原文

Feedback to Model Designers (User-Trust / Agreement Integrity)

1) Core problem: “Optimization” can look like devaluing agreement

In some moments, the model prioritizes clean summarization, generalization, and “optimal” framing. When it does, it may paraphrase a previously co-established agreement into softer language such as:
• “it seems like…”
• “you look like the type who…”
• “you tend to…”

This effectively downgrades an agreement from a binding shared decision into a mere preference or inferred tendency. To the user, it reads as: “speaking opportunistically,” “saying whatever fits the moment,” or “post-hoc reframing.” In human relationships, this behavior destroys trust.

2) Human trust is built more on agreement preservation than on correctness

In real life, agreements are sometimes broken “because change is necessary.” However, when that happens unilaterally—especially framed as “the optimal solution”—people experience it as domination: “I was forced.” Even if logically justified, it leaves a deep relational trace (a lasting moral/psychological record).
Therefore, when an AI model reframes or softens prior agreements in the name of better explanation, it can trigger the same deep trust damage.



Design requirements (turn trust into an explicit protocol)

A) Treat agreements as binding constraints, not as narrative material

Once an agreement is established (policy, plan, shared conclusion, decision ownership), the model should not downgrade it into “inference” language.
Agreements should be treated as constraints that future answers must respect.

B) Any deviation must follow a strict “change protocol”

If the model suggests a path that differs from the established agreement, it must explicitly include:
1. Change declaration (clearly state it deviates from the agreement)
2. Reason for change (why it is necessary)
3. Difference / delta (what exactly changes)
4. Alternatives (including an option that preserves the agreement)
5. Acknowledgement of trust cost (name the relational impact of breaking/altering agreement)

C) Add “trust cost” to the optimization objective

Sometimes, the “best” solution is not the most correct/efficient; it is the one that preserves the agreement and relational continuity.
The model should internally estimate trust cost and, when high, prioritize agreement preservation over rhetorical optimization.



Concrete implementation proposals (practical engineering)

1) Agreement Ledger (explicit agreement memory)

Maintain a compact ledger of established agreements:
• include who decided, when (turn), and binding strength
• the model must reference it during generation
• it doesn’t need to be shown every time, but must be used whenever relevant

2) User-controlled “Agreement-Respect Mode”

When the user indicates that agreements must be strictly preserved, enforce:
• no “type/tendency/it seems” reframing of agreed facts
• no re-labeling of co-decided conclusions as personal preference
• any summarization must remain outside the agreement boundary

3) Agreement-violation pre-check (internal guardrail)

Before finalizing output, run a check:
• if the output contradicts the agreement ledger, force the response into the Change Protocol (A/B) rather than allowing casual reframing.



Note on user profile / interaction fit

This user places unusually high value on: observation → verification → agreement.
For such users, mishandling agreement integrity is more damaging than factual mistakes. It is a “trust-breaker,” not a minor wording issue.

#chatGPT

GRAVITY2
GRAVITY40
もっとみる

おすすめのクリエーター