luckylion

If you have a "pure" UBI that is paid out, and you create 0 taxable value, you receive 100% of UBI.

If you have negative income tax and you create 0 taxable value, how much do you receive?

My understanding is that it was 20x 5-hour-usage, never weekly. And they now just removed the 5-hour-limit on that plan alltogether.

Manufacturing does not benefit from robots and modern machines? Sciene does not benefit from computers?

I don't follow.

Honestly, leaving everyone vulnerable and sitting on the patch while the exploits are out in the wild (i.e. no more use of delayed release) is hard to stomach.

A lot of people are going to do the math on migrating. Bugs happen everywhere. Leaving the community out in the cold and only supplying the corporate sponsors doesn't.

Anti-fingerprinting is mostly there to be able to use the same browser across many requests, I assume?

I found that a slightly-modified firefox for more stealthy remote-control works fine and gets a pass on all automatic captchas I tested. but I don't do it at scale, I just wanted something to automate a particularly stupid website that I have to use.

Would love to see if my browser is detected -- any recommendations for tests to run?

"Software engineers are poor and can't afford $20/month".

linkedin-drivel.

I've reported high-volume exploit scanners multiple times, and when expiring blocks a week later, they typically would show up & resumt with the same IP at some point.

Maybe they'd care if the account was using a stolen credit card and there was a chance they wouldn't get their money, but they definitely do not care otherwise for normal people like me. I'm sure that'd be different if it's a multinational or a country-level government body is reporting something, but I can't get those to do my bidding.

What sites would they be targeting? Generic "just give me anything"? Whenever I check regular sites on IA, the coverage is spotty -- they'll have the homepage and a few important pages, but it quickly fizzles out.

Very understandable, you can't store all 15000 pages of any random website and update them etc etc, but that makes them pretty useless for indirect scraping because you usually don't want a tiny taste, you want everything.

Does section 230 shield them from ads they select for display? Ads are not randomly hosted by random people and if you visit a random page those people uploaded, you see them. Google selects the ads they want to show you on search results, before youtube videos, or on third party websites. There's no "we don't know what that might be" going on at all -- they are running sophisticated algorithms to optimize the impact of those ads. Is that still be covered under section 230?

Are not all corporations extractive by nature? Google clearly is.

That's obviously not the issue with that -- you don't see those comments on Google's AI announcements.

In this case, you know who claimed it. In most cases, you don't, because Google does not verify identity.

It's currently the rage in blackhat SEO: just say you're John Doe from Doeville and competitorsite.com is infringing on your copyright. Google will remove that specific URL from the SERPs and there's a 50/50 chance whether the target gets a notification from google or not.

If they do, they can counter claim directly and it takes 12-48 hours to be reinstated.

If they don't, they have to figure out what's going on by using the Lumen Database (the only way to receive that information because Google is horribly bad at basic legal matters) and finding the notice, which will contain the exact URL (because fun fact: the claim and counter-claim are case-sensitive, the removal-from-serp is case-insensitive), and then do manual counter-claim, and it takes anywhere from 3 to 30 days.

During that time, your competitor will just be gone from the SERPs.

> Where is the big browser, operating system, or other piece of work that has been able to quickly compete with the existing entries in the market due to LLMs?

Why would it "quickly compete"? What if AI gives you a 100x leverage but not a 100000x leverage?

With the 100000x leverage, you could spin up a full browser and compete, but not with the 100x. With 100x, you could use fewer people or do it in less time, but the amount of effort that goes into browsers still doesn't make it "an afternoon for one person".

I think it's undeniable that an excavator is ridiculously more powerful than a human at digging holes. Let's say it's 100x more efficient.

But if you had 1000 people work on a big hole every day for 5 years, the excavator wouldn't manage to do the same in a day, but it would allow you to do the same with 10 people and 10 excavators in 5 years, or with 50 people and 50 excavators in one year.

I don't think it scales linearly the more complexity grows, but "it hasn't been done, therefore it isn't possible" seems wrong. Maybe the big labs could build a browser, but they'd much rather spend the attention of 50 engineers on something else.

I found that agents help, even if you don't parallelize. Having one agent control another and verify its results against rules you set has worked well for me because the controlling agent has no incentive to cut corners, and the implementor might, but it is being controlled.

My usage might be much simpler than what you do, but it went from "but I gave a list of things to do, you only did 5 of them" - "okay, here are the other 7, oh btw, I skipped the verification rule because nobody has time for that" to good compliance, the orchestrator starts the sub agents, tells them exactly one thing to do, and makes sure they've done it afterwards.

makes sense on planning as well, I think. spend your tokens on the best model to explore the problem and design the solution, but the implementation and testing/verification cycles don't need the strongest model you can get.

"Do not use react. Do not use tailwind. We will not deploy on vercel."

and suddenly things work again, it's magic!

I'm on the other side, and my main tip (at least if there's people like me!) is: avoid the usual AI signs.

For one role we got ~70 applications and all CVs looked obviously AI-written. I don't know whether the people did actually do any of the things mentioned and I don't have the time to find out, so the AI-written CVs are a discard-signal for me. (Either those people delegated a very important task to AI and didn't even bother to check, or they are bad using AI and don't know -- I want neither)

Any CVs that signal they were actually written by a person I will actually look at.