I'm guessing you vibe-coded this and let the model hallucinate the decibel thresholds? I randomly googled a couple (Philly and Fort Worth) and the limits shown in the UI don't match up with any law I could find. Philly doesn't have a specific decibel threshold (the law is based on decibels above standard background noise) and Fort Worth's is 70 / 60, not 60 / 55, with higher limits in non-residential areas.
So it's safe to assume that most of the other limits hardcoded in the tool are wrong as well. Pretty irresponsible to release this without even taking the few minutes to research the laws yourself.
A few more concerning claims:
- "US One-Party Consent": This is not a thing, it varies by jurisdiction. Many states are two-party consent.
- "Standards database updated quarterly from public records": It would not appear that way!
- "Not Legal Advice": You are giving legal advice, and it's incorrect.
IANAL but I don't think you can invoke the two party consent laws regarding noises loud enough to be disruptive to other people through walls and such. The recording consent laws typically apply to things like phone calls I believe.
JetBrains' excellent DataGrip IDE is free for non-commercial use, and IntelliJ Ultimate (which includes the DB functionality in addition to every single thing in all their other IDE products) costs a little under 3x what you're asking for for this app alone. A bit of a hard sell.
Most JetBrains IDE's include the database tools actually, we use Phpstorm and PyCharm, and they come with fully-fledged database connection support; that includes in-editor completion of queries against your schema, by the way, in addition to the myriad of features DataGrip and the DB plugin provide. I wouldn't switch to any external tool anymore
I’m a solo founder, past life I’ve done the whole raise 8 figures, hire a hundred plus people…this is a way better life. Currently around 430k arr and growing.
It likely just hallucinated the ADHD thing in this one chat and then made this up when you pushed it for an explanation. It has no way to connect memories to the exact chats they came from AFAIK.
or had this info injected into its system prompt and was doing everything not to reval it. ChatGPT gets fed your IP address* and approximate location in its system prompt but won't ever admit it and will come up with excuses. Just ask it "search the web to find where im at". It will tell you the country you are in, sometimes down to the city. If you follow up with "how did you know my approximate location?" it will ALWAYS tell you it guessed it. Based on past conversations (that never happened), based on the way you talk, it can even hallucinate that you told it in this exact conversation.
*not entirely sure. I t seems to frequently hallucinate the address
No! Maybe I wasn't entirely clear in what I wanted to say.
The point is ChatGPT gets various info about you and it won't disclose to you that it has them.
There's the memory feature, but various reports (and my own experience) indicate that even if you disable it, some stuff you've said before (or the LLM inferred) is still fed into its sytem prompt.
We also know that AI can sometimes make up stuff. I think it might have "guessed" the user has ADHD, this got added into the system prompt and it won't be revealed to the user considering how this works. It wasn't done on purpose and wasn't malicious.
An adult who weighs 75 kg, so is targeting about 75 grams of protein intake per day, would only need to eat 833 grams of cooked chickpeas (which are 9% protein by weight) to get there. That is indeed a lot of chickpeas! But a lot less than you claimed, and you probably shouldn't be getting all your protein from chickpeas anyway.
You're probably talking about dry weight. My can says 6g protein / 130 g. I'm about 100kg and to hit the 1.6 g protein/kg I need 160g of protein. 6g/130g * 3500 g is 161 g of protein.
- Canned, drained and rinsed: 7g protein / 100g [1]
- Boiled: 9g protein / 100g [2]
Not sure what explains the discrepancy (though the second number is much older), but both are considerably higher than what your can says. Sure you aren't reading a per-serving amount?
> Meat is actually super easy for humans to digest and it has no downsides to it.
In moderate amounts, sure. But frequently eating red meat (more than two or three servings a week) is terrible for you. There's "a clear link between high intake of red and processed meats and a higher risk for heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and premature death": https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/whats-the-bee...
Not to mention how high heat cooking of meat, which is common for a steak via frying, brings health risks from Advanced Glycation End products (AGEs).
AGEs are also present in vegetables and legumes, but certain meats like bacon contain unbelievable amounts relative to other foods. (Interestingly: Rice contains almost no AGE's.)
"We put a bunch of meat derived products with high amounts of artificial additives together with actual meat and then concluded that meat is the problem"
So it's safe to assume that most of the other limits hardcoded in the tool are wrong as well. Pretty irresponsible to release this without even taking the few minutes to research the laws yourself.
A few more concerning claims:
- "US One-Party Consent": This is not a thing, it varies by jurisdiction. Many states are two-party consent.
- "Standards database updated quarterly from public records": It would not appear that way!
- "Not Legal Advice": You are giving legal advice, and it's incorrect.
reply