intended

20 ms·

451.
by intended 6mo ago
Yaay! I get a chance to bring up IOED - the illusion of explanatory depth [1] We kinda know how something works, but if we had to draw it out, we’re stumped. The classic example is drawing a bicycle or explaining how a flush works. (You mig
452.
by intended 7mo ago
Benefitting from creating externalities and harming the commons.
453.
by intended 7mo ago
Yet, that is what the markets are operating on. Dismissing their words, just brings us back to the issue of what is really going on. And lest it is forgotten - AI is a huge part of the US economy at this point. It is highly dependent on fir
454.
by intended 7mo ago
I think you are correct in asserting the mercy-disciple of market forces. I also think that counter points on the inhumanity of firms, misses that economies are an objective way to structure incentives to achieve subjective ends. If you wan
455.
by intended 7mo ago
> “Cool it already with the semicolons, Kyle.” No. I cut my teeth on Samuel Johnson and you can pry the chandelierious intricacy of nested lists from my phthisic, mouldering hands. I have a professional editor, and she is not here right
456.
by intended 7mo ago
> I know this because a part of my work as a moderator of a Mastodon instance is to respond to user reports, and occasionally those reports are for CSAM, and I am legally obligated to review and submit that content to the NCMEC. Oh ** th
457.
by intended 7mo ago
Bear with me this digression into freedom of speech, before addressing your point. The utilitarian argument for freedom of speech and expression in America finds its roots in the Marketplace of ideas. Verification is frankly, the task of al
458.
by intended 7mo ago
I’m in India, and I sure as shit haven’t seen what you are talking about. In 2025, we lost 22931 crores to cyber fraud - about 2.7 billion USD. People are now saying that they are relieved if the losses were only single digit crores lost. I
459.
by intended 7mo ago
Tech changes do not impact attackers and defenders equally. Good things do not all have the same properties - That’s mistaking an incomplete assertion for a complete one. Cyber security is an attackers domain. Your security is typically b
460.
by intended 7mo ago
Not that I know of, I only managed to get this far in my analysis. I have a protocol that might work, but theres a huge gaping hole in the protocol. I thought about your position again, and there is a large amount of merit to creating human
461.
by intended 7mo ago
The task was essay writing, and the three 3 groups were No tools, search, ChatGPT. The people who used chatGPT had the most difficulty quoting their own work. So not boilerplate, CRUD - but yes the advantage is clear for those types of task
462.
by intended 7mo ago
It a side effect of using AI. People using AI for tasks (essay writing in the MIT study linked below) showed lower ownership, brain connectivity, and ability to quote their work accurately. > https://arxiv.org/abs/25
463.
by intended 7mo ago
Proof of human is the natural first stop. Your solution shares its essence with a club, a WhatsApp group or interest group. It works, but you will still be at the mercy of the large communities and economies of thought that the members ar
464.
by intended 7mo ago
The study compares ChatGPT use, search engine use, and no tool use. The issues with moving from ASM to C/Fortran are different from using LLMs. LLMs are automation, and general purpose automation at that. The Ironies of Automation came
465.
by intended 7mo ago
The articles didn’t blame LLMs, they talked about how they would get used, precisely through the lens of systems, incentives and culture.
466.
by intended 7mo ago
MIT actually has a paper on how ChatGPT use impacted cognitive skills for essay writing. > Your Brain on ChatGPT: Accumulation of Cognitive Debt when Using an AI Assistant for Essay Writing Task > https://arxiv.org/abs
467.
by intended 7mo ago
I’d andd another layer - for American tech workers, regulation also reduces profits. This hurts salaries, stocks options and career growth. Incentives make the world go round, so even if people recognize the issue, they would rather it beco
468.
by intended 7mo ago
Our society, pre internet, built systems to manage trust. The conditions that allowed those systems to exist (the speed of transmission of data, the ratio of content generation to verification, the ability to shape consensus), have changed.
469.
by intended 7mo ago
People have measurably lower levels of ownership and understanding of AI generated code. The people using GenAI reap a major time and cognitive effort savings, but the task of verification is shifted to the maintainer. In essence, we get
470.
by intended 7mo ago
Drones have upended the unit economics of combat and made older doctrines less relevant. Drones seem to combine the benefits of missiles level payloads, aircraft level control and ability to project force over a distance. I don’t see any te
471.
by intended 7mo ago
This is the user I took the example from: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47689648#47696789
472.
by intended 7mo ago
In many examples, LLMs betray the fact that they are not reasoning, because when provided with problems that can be solved with the ability to reason, they fail. Even in this discussion someone provided an example of coming up with board ga
473.
by intended 7mo ago
This assumes the limiting factor is content generation, not ability to read and verify. You make the point later in your comment, but consider it a minor issue. “Randos” the actual limits are verification, and then attention. Verification i
474.
by intended 7mo ago
I don’t think thats how fair use works.
475.
by intended 7mo ago
Yes. 1) Quantity is its own quality: Scale makes a difference 2) The tools themselves automate tasks and consolidate their outputs. The “sale” of a piece of content, and its consumption, shifts away from the people producing it Example: We
476.
by intended 7mo ago
> I write for two main reasons > people read things… their life is better > it’s just my own What was the point of writing this though? Perhaps I should know who you are, but assuming you are a regular HN forum user - you are still
477.
by intended 7mo ago
Forest for the trees? I doubt that anyone reading this can’t get the point of the analogy. The value is in showing where the analogy fails, and either disproves the point, or deepens the point.
478.
by intended 7mo ago
This would make sense if the regime command structure had apparently not designed itself for this exact type of conflict. They were in a fight, took losses, and made significant gains. They proved their planning was correct, that the distri
479.
by intended 7mo ago
This came across as so confident that I had a moment of doubt. It is most definitely an attackers world: most of us are safe, not because of the strength of our defenses but the disinterest of our attackers.
480.
by intended 7mo ago
I’ve just gone through 3 separate papers on the cognitive impact on GenAI, and the points being raised are far more nuanced than what you are assuming them to be. I mean, you could read the papers themselves, they aren’t inimical to your po

More ›