_dain_

on the one hand it's a nasty thing to say he should be "ashamed" for not mentioning it. on the other, it is a little strange he hadn't come across the "amortized O(whatever)" concept before. esp if doing a talk about it..

neither of them come across well here.

It's becoming increasingly common. Rust is my first systems programming language too. I tried to learn C a few years ago but I found it too austere and prickly, which put me off.

This kind of framing-inversion might work as a coping mechanism to get you through some dark times as a spergy adolescent. But eventually you have to reconcile yourself to the reality of autism: it really is a neuro-developmental disorder and you actually do have deficits in social understanding, which you might be able to improve with deliberate effort. You have a lot stacked against you, but if you're well into adulthood and still stewing in this self-defeating resentment, that is a moral failing.

The linked article is old so it pre-dates the "neurodivergence" idea, but the comments here are using it uncritically. "Neurodivergence" de facto just means "autistic and/or ADHD", usually with a particular kind of autistic taking a dominant role in discussions and advocacy. It has always been a political coalition (quite an esoteric one).

But when you take ADHD on its own terms, the social-model extremism of "neurodiversity" advocates is particularly silly and harmful. ADHD people are perfectly happy with the disability-model; there clearly is something wrong with our brains, it's measurable with brain scans, and the symptoms can be improved with drugs. Don't tell me that ADHD is some equally-valid "attention orientation" or whatever social-model pretzel phrase you might come up with.

As for autism: try telling someone with severe autism, someone who can't speak or clothe or feed themselves that what they are living with is just another perfectly valid neurotype. Try telling it to their caretakers. It's a risible luxury-belief enjoyed by autistics only slightly on the spectrum, and indulged by people who don't know better.

You know how you try to run in a dream, and you don't get anywhere? Imagine if your motor cortex started to expect that, when you're awake. It would destroy you.

The right way is a + (b - a)/2.

This is becoming an idée fixe among the HN crowd. Seemingly nothing can dislodge it, no matter how alarming the incident.

GPT-6 could grab the nuclear launch codes tomorrow and there would be a top-voted comment chuckling that it's all some scheme to pump up the IPO.

---

Put another way, how would you have done the write-up about one of these breakout incidents, if you were in an Anthropic/OpenAI employee's shoes, and (by hypothesis) your intent were not "marketing"? And in a way that doesn't trigger the "it's all marketing" HN top-ranking comment?

Sign language is a fully fledged language, as capable of expressing deep and complex thoughts as spoken English. Likening it to some kind of prosthetic for second-rate thinkers is insulting.

Napoleon and Columbus have secured for themselves their seats in the pantheon of history and it will take longer than a thousand years for mankind to forget about them.

All these men built our world.

And on the subject of weapons, consider the example of a delayed-action fuze. They're designed to penetrate through the outer defenses of a target, before the warhead detonates deep inside. What might this look like in written form?

Well, you'd start by getting on the reader's side, with shared loathing against some outgroup. Get them to let their guard down. And then at the end:

>Use AI to make things clearer, not longer. Let it sharpen your thinking, not replace it.

You, yes you, the very clever and sophisticated person reading this who is exasperated by slop-grenades, should use AI more. You should use AI to "sharpen your thinking". You use AI, but in a good way. Not like those rubes, who use AI in a bad way.

Use AI. Use AI. Use AI.

Bang!