4 ms·

This seems to be the standard response to Ed’s work. He presents facts and figures that backup his theories in a painstaking manner and then detractors reply wi

This seems to be the standard response to Ed’s work. He presents facts and figures that backup his theories in a painstaking manner and then detractors reply with something like this. Following HNs guidelines, my most charitable interpretation of your response is that you don’t understand the arguments or numbers behind them and you aren’t just dismissing the arguments because you don’t like them. For that I’m saying you need to feed the article to the LLM of your choice and work back and forth until you get to an understanding of what’s being argued.

bbor 2mo ago
A simpler answer to why people always accuse him of being a bad writer is that he’s a bad writer, not that they’re too dumb for his genius. > For that I’m saying you need to feed the article to the LLM of your choice Ahh, the daily cry of the AntiAI crusader. Pretty fun to see it over here, tho! Usually it’s confined to reddit and bsky.
minimaxir 2mo ago
> Following HNs guidelines, my most charitable interpretation of your response is that you don’t understand the arguments or numbers behind them and you aren’t just dismissing the arguments because you don’t like them. For that I’m saying you need to feed the article to the LLM of your choice and work back and forth until you get to an understanding of what’s being argued. That definitely does not follow HN guidelines.
shiandow 2mo ago
You can call it painstaking but I mostly found it painful to read. I mean you don't need that much text or numbers to argue most of the AI hardware spend seems driven by two companies, who likely need to spend more next year to match projected growth. But then there's a lot of repetition and calling those two companies unprofitable and unsustainable, which I really hoped he would expand upon but he didn't get that far before I gave up.

bbor 2mo ago

A simpler answer to why people always accuse him of being a bad writer is that he’s a bad writer, not that they’re too dumb for his genius. > For that I’m saying you need to feed the article to the LLM of your choice Ahh, the daily cry of the AntiAI crusader. Pretty fun to see it over here, tho! Usually it’s confined to reddit and bsky.

minimaxir 2mo ago

> Following HNs guidelines, my most charitable interpretation of your response is that you don’t understand the arguments or numbers behind them and you aren’t just dismissing the arguments because you don’t like them. For that I’m saying you need to feed the article to the LLM of your choice and work back and forth until you get to an understanding of what’s being argued. That definitely does not follow HN guidelines.

shiandow 2mo ago

You can call it painstaking but I mostly found it painful to read. I mean you don't need that much text or numbers to argue most of the AI hardware spend seems driven by two companies, who likely need to spend more next year to match projected growth. But then there's a lot of repetition and calling those two companies unprofitable and unsustainable, which I really hoped he would expand upon but he didn't get that far before I gave up.