keeda

60 ms·

871.
by keeda 1y ago
> That's more than enough data. Is it? I'm no expert, but while it may seem enough in absolute numbers, I can imagine more nuanced criteria like diversity of queries, results and users may matter more than just volume, and th
872.
by keeda 1y ago
What is missing in this discussion is the fact -- explicitly called out by the court in the opinion, see e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45109999 -- that Google Search is so good because it gets so much search tra
873.
by keeda 1y ago
Reid Hoffman, LinkedIn co-founder, has gone whole hog on that idea and has a literal AI clone of himself, trained on all his writings, videos and audio interviews -- complete with AI-generated deep-fake visuals and cloned voice: https:&#x2
874.
by keeda 1y ago
I don't know, anecdotally I never heard MSFT employees grumbling about stack ranking. The lack of internal collaboration seemed to be more top-down, stemming from powerful execs expanding and protecting their fiefdoms. Compare that to,
875.
by keeda 1y ago
I always thought Ballmer was an underrated CEO. He knew who was really important for the success of his company. What other billionaire tech leader is ever going to get up on stage all sweaty and rave and chant and dance for people like me,
876.
by keeda 1y ago
Heck, even in 2013-2015 people were counting them out.
877.
by keeda 1y ago
I'm curious to hear more about your take on why the culture change could be a mistake. From speaking to a couple of long-timers at Microsoft, while they didn't seem to have complaints under Ballmer, they did seem to welcome some a
878.
by keeda 1y ago
They do "understand" in some sense that is good enough for practical usage: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45067653 TL;DR: Even without being explicitly prompted to, a pretty weak LLM "knew" that a
879.
by keeda 1y ago
Quick test on Llama3 running locally on my laptop (i.e. not a very powerful model). Prompts and outputs with extraneous details elided: --- "You are an intelligent fast food restaurant automation system. For any order, generate an API
880.
by keeda 1y ago
Funnily enough, I left a similar comment just the other day: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44944717 The conclusion I reached was different, though. We learnt how to do outsourcing "properly" pretty quickly
881.
by keeda 1y ago
More of a error-correcting feedback loop rather than a filter, really. Which is very much what we do as humans, apparently. One recent theory of neuroscience that is becoming influential is Predictive Processing -- https://en.wiki
882.
by keeda 1y ago
I've prefered to riff off of the other quote: "All (large language) model outputs are hallucinations, but some are useful." Some astonishingly large proportion of them, actually. Hence the AI boom.
883.
by keeda 1y ago
It is difficult to get a man to stick to his principles when it is his salary that those principles will impinge upon.
884.
by keeda 1y ago
https://ai.vixra.org/pdf/2506.0065v1.pdf
885.
by keeda 1y ago
> After finishing the port, most of the agents settled for writing extra tests or continuously updating agent/TODO.md to clarify how "done" they were. In one instance, the agent actually used pkill to terminate itself aft
886.
by keeda 1y ago
Building a robust, performant distributed database on top of a standalone database is not at all trivial. Sure, you could boil it down to "consensus algorithm + DB" but there are countless edge cases. I am not very familiar with t
887.
by keeda 1y ago
> India brought it down dramatically and is continuing to do it. A simple Wikipedia search can tell you this. What the Wikipedia search won't tell you is that the methodologies and poverty guidelines used in making some of these c
888.
by keeda 1y ago
One thing I recently realized is that the evolution and discussions of AI very closely mirrors those of offshoring, when offshoring first started off. Back then too discussions were about: 1) The quality of work produced being sub-par, with
889.
by keeda 1y ago
We're not discussing legal definitions. From the original post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44908809 > It's not "theft" by any reasonable interpretation of the word. That is the standard un
890.
by keeda 1y ago
All your arguments are assertions or appeals to authority with no logical reasoning supporting them. I invite you again to pinpoint the flaw in this very brief 2-point reasoning (with a number of supporting links above) that nobody over the
891.
by keeda 1y ago
> The copying of passwords does not cause direct harm. If it did, then the publishing of common password lists would be harmful and criminal. The real crime is the act of breaking into someone's bank accounts and draining their mon
892.
by keeda 1y ago
Sigh, I knew the word "take" would invoke pedanticity... So when you "take interest" or "take advantage" or "take a look" or "take your time", what tangible good is being "taken"?
893.
by keeda 1y ago
Wait, I thought we decided we were using the word "theft" informally. Like all those examples I posted above and you agreed with. What is being "taken" in "wage theft" or "identity theft" or "jok
894.
by keeda 1y ago
>We've established nothing of the sort. Oh no we have. Your original these was based on the premise that "just copying numbers" is not "victimless". So now why is there even a concern that money is being transf
895.
by keeda 1y ago
> As I said, we already had this conversation ages ago and your side lost. Repeating that does not make it true. > A lot of the rest use an informal (not legal, and highly subjective) definition of the word "theft" -- but
896.
by keeda 1y ago
So now we have established that not all numbers are "just numbers" that can be copied victimlessly. Consider that maybe it is because some numbers represent something more than just numeric values. Maybe they represent economic v
897.
by keeda 1y ago
I think the GP's point was that we humans consider ourselves intelligent, but we evolved and clearly weren't designed to be intelligent. One could even say that our intelligence was... "emergent". Furthermore, our hist
898.
by keeda 1y ago
> The entire set of laws supporting intellectual property boils down to making knowledge and transmission of certain numbers illegal. It's illegal for me to write certain numbers on a piece of paper and give the paper to you. That&
899.
by keeda 1y ago
> We already had this debate decades ago, and your side of the debate lost. It's not "theft" by any reasonable interpretation of the word. That's only true when you ignore many, many common usages of the word "
900.
by keeda 1y ago
I recall reading 10+ years ago that Chinese economists were calling for stronger IP laws in China to accelerate their technical progress. Maybe the government listened. This matches the economic literature [1] about the historical developme

More ›