digitailor
Joined 16 years ago
Joined 16 years ago
Edit: The current HN bio of this user amazes me. "Used to have close to 1000 karma, got destroyed over time by hackernews cancel culture and a change in downvote algorithms." This user is literally the victim who doesn't know that they're a victim that they "see all the time." This makes perfect sense, assuming they own mirrors
Now, if I had a victimhood mentality, I would be decrying the fact that this comment was downvoted. But I won't, because the downvoting is a positive that helps prove my point. Thank you for the downvote, unknown victim of victims, I am eternally grateful to you and your kind
(The master buses in DAWs and digital hardware use even larger word lengths these days, but it's not really the same thing, that's a summing and calculation process)
Just, wow. Thank you for this.
Nice work, fun and the repeats system is cool
The really concerning thing is that in BS Wars, the party that's willing to BS most flagrantly and not be seen as truthful tends to win: https://post.news/article/2LGf4ziMatzJ3nCHuZv7e6pTKVA
The most powerful and effective and immediately available BS generators will probably rely on machine-generated, unhinged speech. I truly fear for the future of the few reputable internet forums left, because even intelligent people tend to engage with well-optimized BS generators, whether driven by human or machine.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34683697
Been reading HN since 2006 or so and started going to meetups from it soon after that. A bit sad to see how threads can get hijacked by a comment as low value as "GPT is a calculator for words" directly into a sensationalist political issue.
This is an article posted to Hacker News where a defendant was incarcerated by a judge for media manipulation, and journalists who were involved made statements to the judge in support of the defendant. Since the defendant was incarcerated, that makes the journalists involved closer to malfeasant than not, but the entirety of your claim is that there is never malfeasance involved in journalism and the skepticism of the people you're reprimanding is simply "populism." Frankly, that comes off as a bit malfeasant, in the reflexively defensive sense.
Would you like to claim I "know nothing" about the profession of journalism as well? How would you know that I know nothing about the profession of journalism?