jmyeet

42 ms·

361.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
Yeah, this is something I've been thinking about too. LLMs have basically profited from "stealing" (arguably) user-generated content from a time when there were no LLMs. In the LLM era there won't be a new Stack Overflow
362.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
I remember when DBX IPOed and there were a large number of HNers who said proudly they were going to buy the stock and sit on it.. I was always concerned about where Dropbox (and Box.com) goes from here? Network storage always seemed more l
363.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
I've come to the conclusion that high housing prices are pretty much the root of most of our problems and is probably the biggest factor in increasing wealth inequality. I came across the housing theory of everything recently [1][2].
364.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
I would go further than this: all forms of online gambling should be banned, globally. It's probably sufficient to remove them from app stores and to remove their access to the international financial system, which is very doable. The
365.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
I don't really agree with the ruling and framing in Anderson . It feels contrived to view Tiktok's algorithm as a First Amendment expression yet somehow separate that from the content being pushed on the fyp. I think a similar
366.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
I knew it. I've been saying this is going to become an issue for awhile eg [1][2]. For context Section 230 avoids strict liability for an "interactive computer service" hosting third-party content. For comparison, a first-par
367.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
So, oil and gas doesn't really work this way. When you dig a well, hit (hopefully) hit oil. As of the 2010s, we could extract oil from the fractures in the rocks using high pressure water. This is hydraulic fracturing or "fracking
368.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
What we should be doing is reducing our dependence on fossil fuels but nobody gets rich that way. Mines (including oil wells) are incredible wealth concentrators eg [1]. Also, nobody goes to war over a solar panel [2] and weapons are the ul
369.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
What's depressing to me is just how self-serving all this is. The original bill was AB 1043. Who supported that, breaking with other tech companies? Why Meta of course [1][2]! Meta likes this because it pushes liability onto the OS pro
370.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
There are a frightening number of people in the world who simply don't care about what happens to people they don't know or they simply think they're going to be at the top of the food chain one day so they think they will be
371.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
This has the same energy as "if we tax the billionaires, they'll leave". That statement and yours are wrong. Why? Because if it was profitable, they would've done it already. Pretty much any employer would use you as fer
372.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
One of two things happened here: 1. You just quoted 8 USC 1255(a) because it's at the top of the USCIS memo without understanding it; or 2. This is just the most ChatGPT comment. I say this because you clearly don't understand thi
373.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
So here was the first version of your comment that I saw: > The comment is misinformation. For example: >> A consequence of that was that the Supreme Court accepted an interpretation that executive agencies should be government by
374.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
White supremacy never left. There are a whole bunch of people in the US that never got over the abolition of chattel slavery and arguably we're in this mess because not enough slaveowners were strung up after the Civil War. And by &quo
375.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
It sounds like your wife came to the US on an F1 visa, you got married and are now filing or have filed for I130+I485 for her. I assume too that you were a US citizen. These facts may not be correct. IANAL but I absolutely think you should
376.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
I mean this in the kindest possible way while still being critical: I really wish people would stop making definitive statements about things that, I'm sorry to say, they don't understand. This is just wrong. The end result is abs
377.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
IANAL. Seek legal advice. I hope you have an immigration attorney. I honestly think that in this administration, no case should be submitted without an attorney. DIY filing is incredibly risky. What matters here is how your spouse entered t
378.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
So this is an example of being careful what you wish for. Neil Gorsuch's mother had to resign in disgrace as the EPA administrator under Reagan in a case that ultimately became what was called "Chevron deference" [1]. Chevron
379.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
These timelines are wildly optimistic. Boundless is selling a service and I'd recommend nobody actually uses it because you're really paying for nothing. Things like "you are responsible for the information you provide".
380.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
> Far from a loophole, applying from inside the US is the only reasonable way to apply for a greencard. So that's kind of the point, to make the system arbitrary and capricious. It's to make the lives of immigrants more difficu
381.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
If you look at the legal system through the lens of "what benefits the wealthy or powerful?" you will more accurately guess what is going to happen and this goes from local issues such as this one all the way to the Supreme Court.
382.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
This administration is doing things that are illegal. They're getting sued and they're losing. Constantly. But that's expensive and time-consuming for immigrants, which I guess is the point. USCIS doesn't have the author
383.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
There are deeper lesson here. First, a lot of the immigrants that people complain about now are only immigrants because the US fucked up their country. Venezuela is the poster child for this. There are consqeuences to destabilizing other co
384.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
Sorry but this is just patently untrue. Are you American? Because in my experience, most Americans just don't realize how arbitrary and capricious the US immigration system is. Pick any other developed country and the process is genera
385.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
xAI is burning through $1 billion a month [1]. With Anthropic as a customer, it's basically an argument that we're losing money on every transaction but we'll make it up in volume. [1]: https://www.bloomberg.com&#x
386.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
If there were infinite gold bars just sitting on the surface of the moon, it wouldn't be economical to go collect them and bring them back to Earth. No matter how expensive you think any metals are here on Earth, the cost of launching
387.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
It's worth remembering that, according to SpaceX's own filings, they've spent >$15 billion on the Starship program thus far with more to come. And SpaceX is burning cash still, particularly because Elon Musk bailed out his
388.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
So 996 is still a thing but the government is trying to stamp it out [1]. Tang ping is also something the government is dealing with (agree or not) [2]. One of the big problems in China right now is youth unemployment [3], which is (IMHO) r
389.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
My form of autism is going on deep dives into political and history topics and I'm not gonna lie, I've watched a super-long video essays on the 4B movement, neo-confucianism and the chaebols. This [1] I think was one of them. I&#x
390.
by jmyeet 5mo ago
I've thought a lot about (and I don't mean this in a derogatory way) the weebu phenomenon. I remember encountering it first in college when I met people who were in an anime club. It wasn't for me but my philosophy generally

More ›