Gerardo1

9 ms·

61.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
I really, really don't think that's a reasonable metric, especially on short timelines. In a few years, when this has been trialed, approved, there are a few manufacturers? Maybe.
62.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
Are you saying that Trump won the popular vote in 2016?
63.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
> Blackrock does not have any political motives at all How do you figure?
64.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
I'm glad you figured out your issue! Genuinely! That it worked for you, doesn't mean it's a wise general recommendation.
65.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
> The vaccine has been shown to significantly reduce malaria, and deadly severe malaria, among young children. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/malaria > Current malaria vaccines reduce
66.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
> The vaccine doesn't work that well. As your article [4] says It does not say that. And in any case, as we should all very well know by now, vaccines don't have to be 100% effective at disease prevention to be effective at dis
67.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
And so random people on the internet should be advising them to dump their genetic profile into chatGPT for medical diagnostics?
68.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
It costs UNICEF about $4 for a single malaria vaccine[1]. "Globally in 2023, there were an estimated 263 million malaria cases and 597 000 malaria deaths in 83 countries." [2] " In the 20th century alone, malaria claimed bet
69.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
So is dang/HN in general good with the several comments in this thread giving explicit medical advice that is some variation of "don't go to the doctor, use chatGPT"? I'm not sure the value of the discussion around
70.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
Do you feel like you're actually contributing to a conversation, or being a member-in-good-faith of a community if you have to create new accounts to hide what you're saying?
71.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
It's plainly obvious what's going on, and what the near future of HN is if dang and co don't change things.
72.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
Do you feel like you had to create an alt because the globalists are going to delete this? And you didn't want said globalists to interfere with your primary account?
73.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
> Here’s the full prompt we used in this eval. We find it doesn’t nudge the model to hack the test environment very hard. I...find that unconvincing, both that it doesn't "nudge...very hard", and that they genuinely believ
74.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
I don't disagree but I don't think that's what the person I was replying to meant (and their further comments support that idea). I can't see their original comment anymore though, so, who knows.
75.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
> If you want me to literally cite an example I'll do that That is what I asked for, yes. Be clear about what you're saying. If you hesitate to to just say what you believe, that's probably a good indication that some int
76.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
> who are pushing things in dumb directions because their careers and wealth are tied to what they do for work so they advocated for those things to be advanced to the point of absurdity and everyone on their coat tails cheers for it bec
77.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
> The world doesn't need fusion or fission, other technology is plenty good. It's not. If it was the world wouldn't be using 140k TWh of fossil-fuel-produced energy[1], and would be using a lot more than 9k TWh of renewa
78.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
Opinions are usually more nuanced than "it's good/not good", and reducing someone's opinion to that is straw-manning.
79.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
> The reality is none of us can confidently declare things as unequivocally as you do. You can absolutely confidently declare that Google has not been ordered to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico. First, because that hasn't hap
80.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
My point was that you miss-represented the scenario: Google has not been ordered by the President to do anything, because the president doesn't have that authority. Your dishonest redirecting here is both transparent and insulting. Wh
81.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
Executive orders have *zero* authority over private companies and individuals. An executive order can say that, for example, the FTC should sanction companies that don't refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, as the FTC is
82.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
I...do agree that it sounds ridiculous, and my point was that that was not what the original commenter was saying. Your interpretation of their comment is far-fetched, and not a useful entry into a conversation about their point.
83.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
I don't think that's a fair reading of the comment you're replying to. Seems like a purposefully-constructed straw-man to me, really.
84.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
> Or that Google may disregard orders of a democratically-elected leader? Yes because said democratically elected leader has absolutely no legal authority to tell a private business how they should label a geographic feature.
85.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
"Google gives government back-door to all user data so that government can find dissidents" "Google needs to comply with whatever their country decides" If companies can have political opinions, and influence the governm
86.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
Oh it's definitely still driven by hype, I think it's just a slightly more extreme version than your normal tech hype cycle.
87.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
I think the common theme is that a lot of people: meaning both people in the community, like here on HN, and people making decisions in industry, are treating AI today as if it's what they hope it will be in five years. That's
88.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
> Why are we okay with calling "AI" tools like this anything other than curious research projects? Because they are a way to launder liability while reducing costs to produce a service. Look at the AI-based startups y-combinato
89.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
If a government in a country you operate in explicitly makes services like yours illegal for people to use, will you stop operating in that country?
90.
by Gerardo1 2y ago
Some of them do citation okay-ish (which isn't sufficient, but suggests some ability). But I more or less agree with your skepticism. If you looked over my comments on HN, you'd probably think I was a die-hard AI skeptic, but I&#

More ›