Recent submissions

Comment · 22 hours ago
I'm seeing so many more typos on the internet than I did a few years ago. I'm convinced some of it is deliberate to ensure readers the writer isn't AI.
Comment · 2 days ago
I think they mean it will tarnish your legacy. Obviously lying works short term.
Comment · 4 days ago
You could produce a thousand cheap ads for your product or one expensive real ad.
Comment · 4 days ago
Who is asking for this? Do advertisers really want this? I feel dread about many of the AI products being sold. They're mostly tools to help funnel money from the users to the bosses.
Comment · 6 days ago
There has always been some fuzziness behind what counts as "genuine photography" and people have been gatekeeping it for decades as new camera tech became available. Generating statistically likely pixels given the context of the image and massive amounts of (untraceable, stolen) training data definitely seems like a different kind of post-processing than what you'd normally do in an editor, or even changing pixels by hand.

Nikon gets to gatekeep their competition however they like. Personally I think it would be a shame to reward photographers for the work they do outside taking the shot and light editing/compositing. What's the point of a competition if you're not going to enforce high standards and challenging constraints?

Comment · 7 days ago
It is eager to do things it shouldn't do. But I suppose it's better than lying about it. Although they do that too.

From top to bottom, I still think nobody developing these things really cares about security.

Comment · 16 days ago
It's too bad the tone is of a guy I do not want to be around lol
Comment · 16 days ago
It would be a AI company's fault but yeah. You shouldn't be able to sell cars without all the features designed to protect everyone on the road. We all need airbags, seat belts, signals, insurance, etc. even if they're not directly necessary to get from A to B.
Comment · 21 days ago
Beware? He is talking about something he's extremely qualified to talk about.
Comment · 23 days ago
Mathematicians are in no rush. And they are less likely to review math vomit that hasn't even been formalized and verified. Especially among the now thousands of vomit papers out there.
Comment · 24 days ago
I would say that disqualifies them from "understanding" anything. What they're doing is more like a broad search than pursuing a greater understanding
Comment · 24 days ago
A paper and a lean proof are always going to be better than just a paper. I think mathematicians generally will not read AI math papers that haven't already been verified, especially since we're about to see a ton more AI math papers. Lean will remain important
Comment · 1 month ago
I asked free chatgpt to give me some essays that will fool a slop detector and they all fooled this slop detector. Its best guess was "6% slop probability 87% confidence answered in 0.5 s for $0.000027" and yet it was 100% slop.

I am very skeptical slop detectors will ever work.

Comment · 1 month ago
Comment · 1 month ago
ZFC is probably the biggest foundation, and only Choice is apparently controversial. The results aren't that weird, they're just different and occasionally more useful than using !Choice.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton