gbanfalvi

But why organize and risk getting a few of us fired when we can just wait and do nothing comfortably?

You can offer standalone exes without installers.

It’s true. The best approach is to stand alone against the fire and try to put it out yourself. Maybe the fire will be nice to you if you beg.

“Global prosperity” is a good one.

How is global prosperity achieved? Business owners get all the profits of our labor and maybe some of it trickles down? Workers get “prosperous” on crumbs?

I’ll be expectantly awaiting for my prosperity in the mail.

I don't think that's what the page talks about. There are lots of _valid_ opportunities in our day-to-day lives where we'd benefit _so much_ from doing the research, struggle with a problem or reach out to someone ourselves instead of just asking an LLM -- but we just take a shortcut.

I wouldn'tve asked a stranger in a park in Serbia about a statue, but I do recognize that:

- I'm not thinking for myself almost at all when writing code, just orchestrating the work.

- I don't google to learn about topics/questions that come up, i just ask Claude for a summary.

- I don't reach out to people around me if I can just write a prompt.

And it feels like I'm consuming so much more information but retaining only the surface levels of it.

And you don't think AI is going to make these things worse? Even if you only have 3 friends, talk to them, hang out, do stuff with them.

> If something in your software is intentionally malicious or damaging, it's malware.

Seems to me like the library functions as it should. It behaves like a property testing library: it tests properties.

Time to start rendering junk data to all crawlers, including google.

Not sure it’s much of a choice and more of a decision the greedy half make and imposition (often violent) on the other half.

Steel has almost always (as in 99.99...% of the time) delivered to our expectations based on our understanding of it.

The cases where we built something out of steel and it failed are _massively_ outnumbered by the instances where we used it where/when suitable. If we built something in steel and it failed/someone died we stopped doing that pretty soon after.

> Real art always seems to find its fans eventually, and I don't think AI will stop that.

That's what's happening though. Someone is writing a prompt, generating some slop and then directing bots to collect money that will never make it to real artists.

If they were getting too small of a slice before, now it's even smaller.

> But at that point, if the music really is that good, does it matter?

We're very far from "that point". The point we're at right now, which we need to tackle is the one in which we're drowning in slop.

I'm not personally against using AI tools to write code or help someone generate music, but right now it just impedes, devalues and deplatforms the real stuff to make money from a system that hasn't caught up.

I would absolutely not call Rust a simpler Swift. Swift doesn't have and ownership/borrowing system, explicit lifetime for objects, much more expressive (and therefore complex) macro support...

I get that there's a tradeoff. Rust requires you to be way more explicit about what you're intending upfront and that can, in the long term, lead to simpler code -- but there's no dimension (depth-wise or breadth-wise) that I'd call Rust simpler.

Someone should just come up with some middleware that produces jumbled-up responses. Your website will still match the keywords from search engines but be toxic to ai crawlers

> Having large bureaucratic organizations

Yes, that's what the paper argues. Institutions at every scale (say, doctor's clinics, hospitals, entire healthcare systems) are very challenging to access compared to me asking ChatGPT. And it's not just the bureaucracy, but there's time, money and many other intangible costs associated with interacting with institutions.

> [Large bureaucratic organizations]that run everything and aren't held accountable

But they ultimately are. People from all types of institutions are fired and systems are constantly reorganized and optimized all the time. Not necessarily for the better -- but physical people are not black boxes spewing tokens.

Individuals' choices are ultimately a product of their knowledge and their incentives. An MLM's output is the result of literal randomness.

> run the world breaking up families, freedom, and fun

There's lots of terrible institutions vulnerable to corruption and with fucked up policies, but inserting a black box into _can't_ improve these.

> where truth is determined by policy

The truth is the truth. Regardless of what policy says. The question is, do you want to be able to have someone to hold accountable or just "¯\_(ツ)_/¯ hey the algorithm told me that you're not eligible for healthcare"

I think the paper is really good and makes loads of valid points... and it's kinda terrifying.

Having super accessible machines that can make anything up and aren't held accountable run the world is going to break so many systems where truth matters.