Recent submissions

Comment · 10 days ago
Honestly, I'm less concerned with the initial wait and more concerned about how this is run entirely through Google Play Services, leaving Google with the ability to alter the deal next time they have another benevolent security decree.
Comment · 13 days ago
Citogenesis specifically refers to a citation loop. This is just lying on the internet
Comment · 1 month ago
Radicle has been one of those projects that had seemed interesting, but something always bothered me about it. (I think it was very highly tied to the cryptocurrency movement for a while? And the Cyphernet GitHub org seems to have rebranded from a DAO?)

This, unfortunately, kinda seals the deal on never using this thing, at least not for anything I intend to keep private. This isn't about proficiency in some protocol which has XYZ footgun: they never checked that payloads were encrypted. Ridiculous.

Comment · 1 month ago
This is explicitly the problem people notice with LLMs. The text they produce sounds fine only if you are so ignorant of the subject that you can’t properly read it yourself. That’s not a “boon” it’s a flaw.
Comment · 1 month ago
Please link some of the mathematical research which concludes takeover of Earth’s resources by a superintelligent agent is “very likely.”
Comment · 1 month ago
This is a very token-brained take. The length of a work has no bearing whatsoever on its comprehensibility.
Comment · 2 months ago
I truly don't get why people have so much reverence for Pluto. And, unlike something like "fruit," which has a botanical and culinary definition which serve different purposes, I really don't get why anyone would care about the non-scientific definition of planet. Maybe I'm just ignorant here: what's the cultural significance of some celestial object being considered a planet?
Comment · 2 months ago
being selective about who you provide free services to makes you an activist group?
Comment · 2 months ago
As a second factor of authentication, a one-time passcode is supposed to be “something you have,” which is still satisfied when stored in a password manager. It no longer serves as a preventative in the event your password manager is compromised, but it’s still fine if any individual password is.
Comment · 2 months ago
They can provide text which contains thoughts, reasoning, and empathy, but is that evidence of them having thoughts, reasoning, or empathy?

To paraphrase the Chinese room argument: Put me in a room with infinite time, paper, pencils, filing cabinets, and give me an English language list of instructions for doing all the neural-net calculations required to run an LLM. Slide your prompt under the door, and, after doing all the calculations, I will slide the next word out, and so I will repeat until the response is done.

In this thought experiment, I'm just following the instructions. So, in this case, what is doing the "thinking" or "reasoning" or "empathy" here?

Comment · 2 months ago
> And with software it’s even harder as software was never targeted at the mass.

Do products like Adobe Photoshop or Microsoft Office Suite not count as “targeted at mass?” People—normal people—absolutely used to pay for software before SaaS took hold.

I don’t think the problem is that normal people don’t want to buy ““artisan software”” but that people are so cynical about software companies that giving them any money at all is asking to have the rug pulled out from under you.

Comment · 2 months ago
wow absolutely not
Comment · 2 months ago
> The law is currently forcing these companies to destroy the books after scanning them.

No, the law is stopping them from digitally sharing their scans. They are perfectly capable of reselling or donating or storing the books they buy. (Wasn’t Amazon originally a book seller?)

Comment · 2 months ago
Sorry, is your stance seriously that authors and publishers should digitize and freely distribute their work, at their own expense?

Also, who’s forcing AI companies to “ingest” books in such a destructive way?

Also also, if there’s one thing I’ve learned from AI scrapers, it’s that they’d never scan the exact same thing multiple times at the expense of public access to the resource.

Comment · 2 months ago
I find it very interesting that, from what I understand, the LLM use isn’t actually what’s at issue. It’s really just that he worked backwards, beginning with a conclusion and attempting to find evidence towards that end. The LLM chat logs are just a uniquely astounding piece of evidence towards his incompetence.

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton