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

at the end of the article they made a clear distinction between flawed and hallucinated cititations. I feels its hard to argue that through a mistake a hallucinated citation emerge:

> Real Citation Yann LeCun, Yoshua Bengio, and Geoffrey Hinton. Deep learning. nature, 521:436-444, 2015.

Flawed Citation

Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, and Geoff Hinton. Deep leaning. nature, 521(7553):436-444, 2015.

Hallucinated Citation

Samuel LeCun Jackson. Deep learning. Science & Nature: 23-45, 2021.


https://jonathanpagel.com/ should blog more again in the future


You made it to the frontpage :D


I honestly cant believe it lol; first project of mine to make it



When my parent speak about AI, they call it Copilot. Mircosoft has a big Advantage that they can integrate AI in many daily used products, where it is not competing with their core product like Google


And google has it built into my phone's text message app

these days it seems like everyone is trying to get their AI to be the standard.

i wonder how things will look in 10 years.


How do you call this desing/ui astethic? I like it


by copying Teenage Engineering


neumorphism!


"teenage engineering"


You can screenshot and ask chatgpt lol


good catch, actually increased to 1mb, I struggled at the beginning with the 20mb limit for inline data. But will look into the resized versions because i realized sometime is missed great images because of the limit. Thanks for the feedback!



its crazy to me, how the author describes that they broke in his flat and stole an old laptop of a relative, like its an absolutly normal thing. He seems like he just accept its and moves on.


He knows his risks.


you are not. Thats their point


That is definitely not their point. Their point is, quite simply, “don’t punish us, bro”. They don’t give a rat’s ass about the law in general or what it means for other people, they just want to make sure they specifically can do what they please without repercussion.


I think they try to argue around the diffrence of sharing activly (=illegal) and downloading (=valid) with this argument it does not matter if you download one book or 1 million books


Their point is that they are not.


It would set the precedent for everyone. The real difference is that they can beg the question and people like Aaron Schwartz couldn't.


Aaron Schwartz's lawyer could have posed exactly the same claim.

It wouldn't have succeeded, just like this won't.

Lawyers will deploy any possible argument, just in case, even if it has a 0.1% chance of working because why wouldn't you?


On the off chance the defense succeeds I'm proven right, if the defense fails, I'm still proven right as the fine will only be a minor set back for Meta.


No, this is a case of "rules for thee but not for me".


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

Search: