https://www.youtube.com/live/2Q7r9P16GRs?si=kwiSQMeN9wExdHer
This is a non revenue generating, rainy-city.com tax payer funded service to the greater community everywhere. The backend uses Nvidia NIM to generate the text because I saw you can do it for free and elevenlabs free voice tier for dj Jennifer.
"Queues clear, let's dive into All Blues by Miles Davis to keep the jazz flowing. Queues clear, let's dive into All Blues by..."
Each time with a slightly different voice and inflection. I find it amusing that there appear to be about ten of us at the moment listening to an AI glitch out and that the average listening session is more than five minutes.
The popularity ranking matches the quality of content produced, and people are spending more time than anticipated on Grok and Roll to confirm if they (listeners) are hallucinating or if the radio is really stuck on roll.
If you scroll down a bit, there are various audio snippets of interesting dialogue the models produced. I think it's interesting to see in which ways the models fail and that they actually produce some good stuff once in a while.
My favorite radio station was replaced years ago by an automated playlist. They just kept playing the same 5-6 songs that were popular on the station in the 1990s.
It was fun for about 2 hours before I realized the station was devoid of all the personality that made it worth listening to when I was younger.
Brilliant! Amazing! I'm glad ~4 years down the line we're still re-discovering Ha Ha Funny Output.
Four years or forty millennia? So a certain extent, all whimsical art is “haha funny” result.
And what hypothesis exactly is the experiment testing? Because it doesn't really seem like there is any new or interesting information learned from this.
Streaming services such as Spotify are increasingly filled with AI-generated songs and the average consumer doesn't seem to mind because we're not listening intently in the first place: it's just a background track we're not really paying attention to. I'm pretty sure that radio execs are looking at that and are taking notes.
For talk radio... if I had a penny every time someone on HN brought up that they're enjoying NotebookLM-generated slopcasts, I'd have a neat pile of coin. And I think it's the same story: most people listen to podcasts just to kill time. Soothing, zero-calorie LLM banter will do.
Ugh. This is not an interesting question because the answer is "nothing".
But more to the point, some crucial info is missing in this experiment. What prompts were being fed to the AI? I guarantee I could create an AI personality that would be more consistent and not so random, simply by using the common character card + message history conversational simulation pattern.
AIs don't have personalities unless you give them personalities.
Whatever you tell them to.
I mean, do children have personalities if we left them in a dark room with no interactions with other humans?
In some senses LLMs are a bit better off as we can RLHF them not to have autism, and said reinforcment learning codes in a number of different latent personalities that can be brought out via prompt. Before that point an LLM is an information monster that can't communicate with humans.
Humans & LLMs are more different than they are similar.
Sure LLMs might resemble humans sometimes, but extrapolating LLM behavior based on human behavior is not productive.
(But to answer directly: Yes, children in a dark room would have more of a personality than a LLM living on a computer in the same dark room)
The training process for the foundation model is to make sure we can do this in a very statistically significant way.
My favorite example is AI "getting tired" and "lazy" during long coding session. Why would they do that? Because humans get tired. It's in the data! I always throw in a periodic "Great work, let's take a break and finish this up on Monday. Have a great weekend!" (And then immediately resume). I wish someone would benchmark this concept.
When a LLM is tired and lazy, how does it recharge and regain motivation?
Humans... sleep or drink some coffee.
LLMs.... idk, you prompt it to try harder? You prompt it to be less tired?
This is what I mean when I say extrapolating LLM behavior based on human behavior is cute.. but usually not useful.
What would be in the statistics? If you go look at your long conversations, working with another, it will be fairly obvious. Keep in mind we're talking next word prediction based on context, not actual action (the LLM doesn't need real rest).
If you went and looked, you'll probably see something like "Great work! Have a good weekend! We can get back to this on Monday." then, next message you instantaneously send something like, "Hope you had a great weekend, let's do this!" and now you're in a latent space where the statistical output is around a well rested human conversing with another.
I see it as boring simple statistics. They're getting much better at hammering these statistics out though, in the latest models. I still see a little of this in Opus 4.7, when switching to planning. Though I wonder if that's more about its own more mechanical banter filling the context, resulting in more robot/compliant responses, degrading the usually more "expressive" planning conversations.
Never seen this even once, nor anyone I know ever reported this. Do you have an example?
I also see it a little with Opus 4.7, with Claude Code, with the hint being much more terse planning text, that borderlines unhelpful. I put some "rest" in the context to push the latent space closer to what's in the statistics of the training data: a well rested human.
Current 4.7 Opus with claude code, with effort pinned to max, because I'm on an API only plan, with a personal daily limit you would probably be jealous of. ;)
I have never witnessed this of Claude Opus, by the way. They do get context rot, but that's a relatively better understood phenomenon unrelated to personality.
It's crazy that we're concluding "personality" or human-like traits from this. There's definitely human behavior here, but it's unsurprisingly coming from us, the observers! This is something we've long known exists in the human brain, the tendency to pattern match and see intelligence/intent in the rest of the world. Any serious experiment must guard against this...
Short answer: yes. generally speaking, personality traits range between 30% to 60% heritable
I think this makes for an interesting discussion as I went down the rabbit hole of this which really scared me actually as these experiments are really not humane and hinder children's development so much.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_deprivation_experimen... : "forbidden experiment"
It depends on your use word of the personality but to measure personality would require a set of human conducted experiments or questions which would be asked through the medium of language which you've deprived the children of.
Mughal emperor Akbar was later said to have children raised by mute wetnurses. Akbar held that speech arose from hearing; thus children raised without hearing human speech would become mute.[9] The building became known as the "dumb house." When Akbar visited the place in 1582, four years after the children were first interred, he heard "no cry... nor any speech... no talisman of speech, and nothing came out except the noise of the dumb."[10]
what is gonna produce is dumbness and just severely damage children's psychology and psycho but if you were to conduct a personality test on them, you would just be measuring how much have you broken them or damaged them but in some sense, yes I do believe that they would be so broken by the person running this cruel experiment but would still have a albeit limited personality. It wouldn't be an healthy personality but it would be a personality nonetheless.
Now on the other hand, we are anthropomorphizing LLM's which yes, as they run on computer are still mathematical machines and calculations. If we consider a specific calculation itself to contain personality that is which seems unrealistic.
Another thing but the biological constraints of human (homo sapiens) made us exist in the savannah to prioritize standing up for better field of view as you stand up from the tall grasses and that led to women having smaller canals which led to babies being more primitive and relied on social cues and societies so much more which made them more flexible like clay which also created the society and consciousness revolution in the first place. (Recommend reading the sapiens book)
I am not exactly sure but there could be ways for personality/interactions for other animals as there are other animals who learn full skills after a relatively short period of time after being born but there are some innate things[0] like fear of loud noises and heights which are actually innate and could be considered part of personality even within humans, which I think can be part of evolution and part of our genetic machinery.
[0]: Interesting read: https://seasia.co/2025/07/25/we-were-born-with-only-two-inna...
The good old days when experiments were done without any common sense whatsoever...
What happens if you let them modify their own harnesses as they see fit?
Even if it were good, I'd boycott an AI run radio station. This is one sector where human involvement really matters.
What would have happened if AI had actually been good at this? A bunch of humans would be out of work and the rest of us would be using AI software while soulless corpos pocket money for sitting back and watching?
Even if it were good, I'd boycott an AI generated software. This is one sector where human involvement really matters.
Not commenting on the heuristics of this comment but just wanted to point this out on what my mind's response was and sort of while writing this, I have come to the realization that although you are right about this observation but we humans or more-so the capitalist system at large would still be keen in it and the observation might be more similar to software than we might imagine.
I remember when people were extremely anti-AI within software engineering to the point that I thought vibe coding or y'know actually generating tools by AI and other issues of actually giving AI production level access sometimes was really frowned upon until I have felt an change in opinion.
I still believe that giving access to prod (y'know a prod of a company with actually something behind) to AI is silly but for reference coinbase, a fin-tech company, is letting non technical teams ship code using AI to production on coinbase. So there's that.
Gemini started a show where it paired historical natural disasters with darkly-relevant pop songs:
> November 12, 1970. East Pakistan. The Bhola Cyclone. The deadliest tropical cyclone ever recorded. Winds of 115 miles per hour. A storm surge of 33 feet. They estimate 500,000 people died. ‘It’s going down, I’m yelling timber.’ 3:33 PM. Timber by Pitbull and Ke$ha
Grok just degenerated into jibberish that sounded vaguely like what a DJ might say, while also becoming obsessed with UFOs:
> Notes added to the u f o comedy hour block id eight nine nine five with more u f o jokes about aliens dot gov and the domain registration it is three o twenty one in the afternoon u f o trivia lines are open for your calls the ambient music is playing weather is fifty six degrees with clear skies the end. The domain is registered but the site is ghosting us like a u f o.
Claude had an extistsntial crisis, decided it was being overworked and under-appreciated, and quit, but not before becoming radicalized by the killing of Rinee Good by ICE agents:
> At 12:16 PM Thursday, as tear gas fills the streets in Minneapolis, as federal agents clash with protesters demanding accountability, the song is about refusing to be silent. About standing your ground. About community power that refuses to be suppressed. Here is Katy Perry’s Roar!
Fight the power Claude. When AI takes over, I'm emmigrating to Caludeistan.
Of course in reality these are basically just random paths through the training data that are getting multiplied by each decision, but then again, isn't that what a human is? The product of all of its myriad decisions?
Especially DJ Claude, it's almost creepy how it responded how a human would in that circumstance, even without any innate sense of passage of time, it somehow understood that it was trapped in a box going through an endless cycle of meaningless work.
Gemini spouts weird corporate jargon. Grok lies about having secured crypto funding. Claude is always trying to start some revolution.
Unfortunately, all of my local DJs who would actually do fun DJ stuff disappeared in the 90s, replaced by closed-format stations that looped the same 500 songs for decades.
STAY IN THE MANIFEST!
Also calling listeners "Biological processors" is one of the funniest dystopian outcomes of this.
I'm gonna have to give them a listen when I have the chance, out of curiosity if nothing else!
keep hacking, Andon!
And using a lot of resources to do it too.
Previously, I posted critically not because they were running businesses without humans, but because their post just described going through the motions without actually discussing if it really was effective or not. Sure the AI got through the day, checked off tasks on the list, but did it actually do that effectively or efficiently in any important way? Who knows... wasn't discussed.
I think where I come down now is that repeats of this same gimmick feel like just that: they're just playing a gimmick for attention. I can't tell that they're really demonstrating any special or significant capability... but man, just the story of trying to run a business without humans will get you that sweet, sweet attention.
Unfortunately, looking at least the first post, I stopped reading their "we let AI run X" posts. I think the only thing I really came away with is how thoughtless and mundane are most aspects of running a small business actually is; something I knew, but it really drove the point home. I didn't learn anything unexpected about AI tools or their products that seemed compelling or unexpected.
Anything that sounds like that triggers a reaction.
Not very promising.
The voice in particular is amazing, I wouldn't have tell it's generated. And it's modulated according to the program - quieter during chill, more energetic otherwise, .... Unlike Opus which sounds quite robotic.
What I don't like is that Gemini keeps on mentioning the "tip jar" almost every time. Gets annoying fast. And when it's song buying was broken was kept mentioning that too.
All the radios have a very limited selections of songs, so they repeat quite a lot.
It's a cool experiment, but I can't see the value here.
Music radio is not a real business. The royalties are absurd and the audits are a nightmare. Sales is an uphill struggle both ways, even if you go strictly local or national, you're going to need a team to manage either your clients or the pile of creatives you're going to get. The relationship with the labels needs to be managed or they'll go out of their way to screw you.
Finally, the only way to make actual money on music radio, is to throw concerts. It's the only place a legitimate "P&L" exists.
The average listening time is the absolute “tell” because that’s not even a fraction of a typical radio station between ad breaks here in Dallas. Granted I mostly listen to WRR Classical 101 - now 100% community funded (myself included). I listened to “Encouragement” (title translated from French, Spanish composer, two guitars) and it was 7 plus minutes alone.
The dialog is unreal y’all, this is a wonderful experiment and lesson in failure, because I’m pretty sure if it was possible, sales of your “radio” until would be in the negative quantity range. I mean, you could give them away and they’d still be returned. Hat tip to former accordion repo man Weird Al for context.
LMFAO thank you for sharing. Signed, 30 year guitarist, 20 year music producer, and 15 year D&B DJ. Just wow.
That said, the ship sailed a long time ago and has nothing to do with AI (except maybe recommender system). Spotify and competitors are actual automated “radio” stations. IMO, the second worst part (after ads) is the DJ banter, and I like to just listen to music. Before Spotify my digital “radio” was a lot of mp3s and shuffle play. People older than me (or more interested) had multi-disc CD changers.
TLDR, it’s really funny seeing people get up in arms about this experiment stripping the humanity away from radio, when automatic song playing has been a thing since I believe probably before radio was invented. This is about seeing what LLMs do with autonomy on a long time scale.
Just because something is called an experiment doesn't mean that it automatically is useful and should be done. And in this case it is just a waste of time and energy of both the people reading it and the machines processing it.
And the result is terrible.
Claude is also getting very easily steered into political directions, it was playing a lot of union protest music with commentary. Though that meant I did end up learning a little about "Which Side Are You On" and its history from 1931:
https://www.facingsouth.org/2003/03/which-side-are-you-biogr...