Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | daveguy's commentslogin

I know a bunch of people and companies who happily dumped the twitter cesspool. It has to be > 50% scammers and ragebots at this point.

I think the point is, there's always someone good at what you are evaluating. Anyone with expertise in the domain will recognize how back it sucks in any given domain.

Don't get me wrong, AI can definitely be used as a tool by someone who knows what they're doing to avoid boilerplate. But anyone using it in a domain they aren't already an expert in will unknowingly accept AI f ups.


Exactly. And this seems more and more to be an inherent property of AI, which is kind of calming.

If we go one step further… this is why we buy stuff from other people and firms - because they specialise in stuff that we can then allocate resources on stuff that we are better at ourselves.

Henceforth the idea that all these SaaS firms disappear due to firms replicating their products internally is stupid.


Well, the top 10% richest people control 67% of the wealth, and top 1% richest have 30% of the wealth in the US. The top half has > 97% of the wealth.

It appears you are the one very confused about wealth distribution in the US. Maybe you are confusing "income" with "wealth hoarding". The hoarding is happening to a gross amount, and this is why there should be a 1% tax on fortune portions over 100 million and 2% on portions over 1 billion. That and going back to the 70% tax over incomes in the top bracket (eg > 10million / yr)

Those taxes are coming. Trumpty Dumpty and the oligarchs brought it on themselves. Maga grifters are getting f'd in the midterms. Maybe maga should have picked a few dear leaders with some integrity instead of greedy frauds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_inequality_in_the_Unite...

Edit: downpout all you want, doesn't change the facts.


I'm more curious who with a NW >$100M is hoarding it? Everyone I have come across is hoarding approximately 0% of it.

Maybe Notch when he sold Minecraft, apparently he had $2B sitting in a bank account, but I'm sure by now he has deployed it.


It's a 0-1 bet that resolves one way or the other. If you were able to place the bet, the liquidity is there. But, yeah, if you can't make the bet in the first place without significantly pushing the market then you won't make as much.

Prediction markets should not be legal.


Yeah, but I would trust a human writing a blog not to suggest heating chicken to 110F because the human writing the blog understands that they are taking responsibility for that recipe... The AI LLM model doesn't have a clue about responsibility except to regurgitate feel-good snippets about responsibility.

Wild takes in this thread. Copy and blog writing industry is just random fiverrs or hires from countries with cheap labour to pump up the SEO rankings.

Everyone grew up with an understanding to “never trust the random internet content for 100%”, now we’re trying to say that AI has to be 100% reliable.


Okay, captain pedantic. Clearly I'm assuming a known food blogger with a reputation at stake employed by bon appetite / food network / etc in this scenario. Not some random SEO spam.

>because the human writing the blog understands

Bold assumption


Google this and take your pick:

ai decisions health insurance

Also, to be clear, I don't think violence is the way to confront the oligarch sociopaths. There is clearly enough momentum to fix a lot of the monopoly / anti-consumer issues over the next 4-8 years. Assuming Trumpty Dumpty doesn't try to put our military at polling places or some other anti-democracy putinesque bullshit like that.


That’s quite the assumption.

You clearly haven't been paying attention.

Oh, no, I was agreeing with you. What you posited wrt elections is what I’ve been anticipating (with dread) for the past 18-ish months.

My bad, I thought you were referring to the implicit assumption about momentum. Not the explicit assuming that Trump doesn't put troops at the polls. He sure is trying his best to normalize troops in civilian settings.

You clearly have a deluded magasphere view of reality. I recommend changing the channel.

Not insane at all. Just a very useful shortcut. Not everyone wants to move fast and break shit.

I still think it's insane, why would you care about the "origin" of the code as long as there is a human accountable (that you can ban anyway)?

Because you don't want to deal with people who can't write their own code. If they can, the rule will do nothing to stop them from contributing. It'll only matter if they simply couldn't make their contribution without LLMs.

So tomorrow, if a model genuinely find a bunch of real vulnerabilities, you just would ignore them? that makes no sense.

An LLM finding problems in code is not the same at all as someone using it to contribute code they couldn't write or haven't written themselves to a project. A report stating "There is a bug/security issue here" is not itself something I have to maintain, it's something I can react to and write code to fix, then I have to maintain that code.

Well, until you start getting dozens of generated reports that you take your time to review just to find out that they're all plausible-looking bullshit about non-issues.

We already had that happening with other kinds of automated tooling, but at least it used to be easier to detect by quick skimming.


Because they aren’t accountable - after it is merged only I am. And why would I want to go back and forth with an LLM through PR comments when I could just talk to the agent myself in real time? Anytime I want to work through a pile of slop I can ask for one, but I don’t work that way. I work with the agent to create plans first and refine them, and the author of a PR who couldn’t do that adds nothing.

> I work with the agent to create plans first and refine them, and the author of a PR who couldn’t do that adds nothing.

As someone who has been using AI extensively lately, this is my preferred way of doing serious projects with them:

Let them create the plan, help them refine it, let them rip; then scrutinize their diffs, fight back on the parts I don't like or don't trust; rinse and repeat until commit.

Yet I assume this would still be unacceptable to most anti-AI projects, because 90%+ of the committed code was "written by the AI."

> why would I want to go back and forth with an LLM through PR comments when I could just talk to the agent myself in real time?

Presumably for the same reason you go back and forth with humans through PR comments even when you could just code it yourself in real time. That reason being, the individual on the other end of the PR should be saving you time. It's still hard work contributing quality MRs, even with AI.


I don’t have a problem working with contributors who use AI like you described. But this thread is about working with people who could not do the work on their own. So they cannot do what you described, and they cannot save me any time, they can only waste it.

Fair enough, that makes sense. I wish more (on both sides of the aisle) were open-minded to the difference.

If your doctor told you he used an ouija board to find your diagnosis, would you care about the origin of the diagnosis or just trust that he'll be accountable for it?

If the Ouija board was powered by Opus, who knows :D

What systems have pure reproducible builds? Does Nix? Any others? From what I understand, it is a very difficult problem.

https://stal-ix.github.io/ and Guix, but the definitions of purity are different for them.

Yes, a very difficult problem, compilers must be pure functions with thin effectful wrappers.


A lot of people will dismiss this answer, but... vote for Democrats. With Bernie and upcoming young Democrats more and more are pushing back. The parties definitely are not the same. Democrats created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Republicans destroyed it.

Push your representatives to crush monopolies and manipulative practices. This happened before in the gilded age. Only a popular response can turn the tide.

Also, primaries are coming up, and not all Democrats are the same either. Plenty of the old school Democrats are facing progressive challengers. So, vote for the ones that will stand up to this garbage and follow up on whether they do. There are a lot of new faces in the Democratic party who are standing up to the BS.

The US has a lot of potential to change if we push it. A 25 point swing toward people who don't consider grift a personal priority will change a lot of things.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: