this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2026
453 points (97.7% liked)
Programmer Humor
28818 readers
1075 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What happend here?
LLMs work by picking the next word* as the most likely candidate word given its training and the context. Sometimes it gets into a situation where the model's view of "context" doesn't change when the word is picked, so the next word is just the same. Then the same thing happens again and around we go. There are fail-safe mechanisms to try and prevent it but they don't work perfectly.
*Token
This happened to me a lot when I tried to run big models with low context windows. It would effectively run out of memory so each new token wouldn't actually be added to the context so it would just get stuck in an infinite loop repeating the previous token. It is possible that there was a memory issue on Google's end.
There is something wrong if it's not discarding old context to make room for new
At least llama.cpp doesn't seem to do that by default. If it overruns the context window it just blorps.
I think there are parameters for that, from googling.
That was the answer I was looking for. So it's simmolar to "seahorse" emoji case, but this time.at some point he just glitched that most likely next world for this sentence is "or" and after adding the "or" is also "or" and after adding the next one is also "or", and after a 11th one... you may just as we'll commit. Since thats the same context as with 10.
Thanks!
He?
This is not a person and does not have a gender.
Chill dude. It's a grammatical/translation error, not an ideological declaration. Especially common mistake if of your native language have "grammatical gender". Everything have "gender" in mine. "Spoon" is a "she" for example, but im not proposing to any one soon. Not all hills are worth nitpicking on.
This one is. People need to stop anthropomorphizing AI. It’s a piece of software.
I am chill, you shouldn’t assume emotion from text.
English, being a descendant of german, used to have grammatical gender. It has fallen out of favor since middle english. But there is still traces of it, such a common tradition is calling ships, vehicles, and other machines as a "she", but some people will default to the "generic he" as well.
Didn't English lose grammatical gender because the Vikings invaded and thought it was too confusing?
As I explained, this is specyfic example, I no more atrompomorphin it than if I'm calling a "he" my toliet paper. The monster you choose to charge is a windmill. So "chill" seems adequate.
To be clear using gendered pronouns on inanimate objects is the literal definition of anthropomorphization. So chill does not seem fair at all.
In some languages, all nouns are gendered, and it's impossible to refer to a noun without a gender. There is no "it", only (s)he.
If you ever learn a language like that, you will make mistakes. If someone hears your mistake, hopefully they'll be more forgiving about it than you are.
you really need to get over yourself. the universe does not revolve around you nor humans. the use of gendered pronouns on inanimate objects is not anthropomorphization.
And you're still fighting this windmill you claim you are so casual about...
Are you actually under the impression that one must be worked up about something to have a conversation about it? Also I never claimed to be casual, I just denied not being chill.
Have an awesome week, Atomicbocks. I unironically appreciate you spreading awarnes about various dangers of AI.
It was explained to be a translation error from a language with pronouns for all objects. I have to disagree with you on this one.
Yeah. It would have been much more productive to poke at the "well", which was turned into "we'll".
You brought this unmistaken "I speak lauder and lauder on my European vacation until waiter that doesn't speek English can finaly understand me" energy to this conversation.
I don’t care that this person, who seems to maybe be typing English on a keyboard with a different language dictionary, misspelled some words.
I care that people in general keep talking about AI like it is living or capable of thinking.
A gendered pronoun as result of translingual grammar bleed doesn't make the AI living and thinking. In German, a corpse would be he or she too (der Leichnam or die Leiche), but I'm pretty sure it's not living or thinking by definition.
You're literally looking at what has been explained at length to be an artifact of a foreign language and attacking it for something it isn't.
Speaking of which, I'll always marvel at this "das" German uses for "Mädchen"
That goes for all diminuitives. Der Vogel (bird), das Vögelchen. Die Flasche (bottle), das Fläschchen. Der Bube (boy), das Bübchen.
My native language is a gendered one and it makes sense that such a mistake might be made using a MTL.
"we'll" on the other hand, is becoming one of those things on Lemmy that everyone goes around using and making others (those new to English) think that it is the correct usage. It might do a little fun poisoning some AI, but it will much earlier, end up changing word usage in ways that make the language even worse than it already is.
I would be fine being told this by someone who wants to destroy the English language, but we are clearly trying to use this as the international communication medium and making it worse for ourselves, just to act anti-pedantic.
Nah, watch me anthropomorphise AI:
Using 'he' in a sentence is a far cry from the important parts of not anthropomorphizing "AI"...
I've got it once in a "while it is not" "while it is" loop.
Gemini evolved into a seal.
or simply, or
It's like the text predictor on your phone. If you just keep hitting the next suggested word, you'll usually end up in a loop at some point. Same thing here, though admittedly much more advanced.
Example of my phone doing this.
I just want you are the only reason that you can't just forget that I don't have a way that I have a lot to the word you are not even going on the phone and you can call it the other way to the other one I know you are going out to talk about the time you are not even in a good place for the rest they'll have a little bit more mechanically and the rest is.
You can see it looping pretty damned quick with me just hitting the first suggestion after the initial I.
I think I will be in the office tomorrow so I can do it now and then I can do it now and then I can do it for you and your dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad and dad
That was mine haha
LLM showed its true nature, probabilistic bullshit generator that got caught in a strange attractor of some sort within its own matrix of lies.
Unmentioned by other comments: The LLM is trying to follow the rule of three because sentences with an "A, B and/or C" structure tend to sound more punchy, knowledgeable and authoritative.
Yes, I did do that on purpose.
Not only that, but also "not only, but also" constructions, which sound more emphatic, conclusive, and relatable.
I used to think learning stylistic devices like this was just an idle fancy, a tool simply designed to analyse poems, one of the many things you're most certain you'll never need but have to learn in school.
What a fool I've been.
Turned into a sea lion