lolinder

17 ms·

241.
by lolinder 1y ago
I didn't use that word and no one in the chain above me did either. I specifically chose "anticompetitive behavior" to emphasize that a monopoly is not required to do damage to the free market or to trigger antitrust action.
242.
by lolinder 1y ago
The consumer did pay the price. Google built on empire on making consumers believe they were getting things for free while selling other businesses a direct line to its customers' wallets. It's been a very effective sleight of h
243.
by lolinder 1y ago
It's about time that people get used to the idea that you have to pay for some of these things. In aggregate it won't even hurt to transition to that: consumers are, in aggregate, already paying for these things in the form of i
244.
by lolinder 1y ago
Exactly. People keep saying "the alternatives aren't as good" as though markets aren't filled with feedback loops and the other products being worse somehow proves that Google is winning on fair terms. Google's pr
245.
by lolinder 1y ago
No, the comment is saying that the situation is only going to get worse from here. There will never be a better time to solve Google's anticompetitive behavior. The consequences should be weighed and considered, but shrugging and letti
246.
by lolinder 1y ago
Sorry, I see that was confusing. I meant tooling for LLMs. Things like Langchain come to mind.
247.
by lolinder 1y ago
I already addressed this possibility in my first comment. Points 1+2.
248.
by lolinder 1y ago
In colloquial English my construction is just fine, but sure, you'd be welcome to pick longer too. Some examples of my usage in the wild ("response times may be slower" is present verbatim on each page): https://gi
249.
by lolinder 1y ago
Are you a native English speaker? "does NOT constrain user's rate limit" should be "does NOT rate limit incoming requests" or similar. "We will try out best" should be "our best". "when our
250.
by lolinder 1y ago
> I need to call or craft an email, be polite and come up with some nonsense greeting maybe for a bullet point or two or a string I don’t want to rapidly shift focus to duplicate by hand. Then I have to sit around and wait for a response
251.
by lolinder 1y ago
You don't need to elaborate on mechanisms for bypassing because you're already imagining a threat actor that is out of scope. This is primarily about blocking accidental leaks by regular employees who were asked to not record bu
252.
by lolinder 1y ago
> I am not screenshotting for espionage, I am screenshotting to accomplish my job. This is literally the threat model that this feature is protecting against: it gives presenters a way to say "no really, when I say don't record
253.
by lolinder 1y ago
It doesn't work against which threat model? Yeah, if you've got corporate espionage going on this isn't going to stop someone from lifting your slides and taking them elsewhere. But the most common culprit of corporate inform
254.
by lolinder 1y ago
It's not pure security theater, there are a few clear gains for those who care about such things: * Naive screencaps are much less traceable to the leaker than a naive photo is. Yes, someone can strip out EXIF data, but we've se
255.
by lolinder 1y ago
Unfortunately when someone says "AI" these days they're not talking about pytorch, tensorflow, or numpy. They're talking specifically about LLMs, which are built on top of those tools but which do show the tendency tha
256.
by lolinder 1y ago
> the documentation is poorly written (all LLM vendors seem to have an internal competition in writing confusing documentation). This is almost certainly because they're all using LLMs to write the documentation, which is still a ve
257.
by lolinder 1y ago
What percentage of the MCP spec is (was?) LLM output? It's setting off all kinds of alarm bells for me, and I'm wondering if I'm on to something or if my LLM-detector alarms are miscalibrated.
258.
by lolinder 1y ago
> Apple to split off only the phone and messaging part of its iPhone Ooh, can we? My wife is super jealous of my ability to install custom apps for phone calls and messaging on Android, it'd be great if Apple would open theirs up to
259.
by lolinder 1y ago
This argument can be made about nearly any anticompetitive monopoly, and that should not stop the government from deciding that, if the business can only exist in its current form, then the business should not exist. You're not entitle
260.
by lolinder 1y ago
You just left two comments that say the same thing. I replied to the one you left first. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43946577
261.
by lolinder 1y ago
> seems much less anti-competitive by nature It seems much less, but I don't believe it is much less anticompetitive. We're talking about the search market specifically in this case, and the government has presented strong
262.
by lolinder 1y ago
That's (a) a different argument than the competition is "too risk averse", (b) subjective, and (c) arguably the result of a number of flywheel effects. That is, Bing's ability to compete is hampered by the fact that Goog
263.
by lolinder 1y ago
Which market are you talking about specifically? The outstanding cases against them are in search and in adtech. This amicus brief is for the Search case (this one [0]). In search (the relevant market here), Microsoft does compete in the
264.
by lolinder 1y ago
I think the author fixates too much on this one construction of the idea of deathbed regrets and misses that this is just a single modern incarnation of the positively ancient and cross-cultural idea that you should plan your life around th
265.
by lolinder 1y ago
I don't use Ruby. I would if it had types. My language of choice right now is TypeScript because it has the best balance of types and dynamism.
266.
by lolinder 1y ago
I'm a professional developer with 20 years of experience and I wouldn't dream of starting a new side project—even with myself as the only developer—without types. I've learned by hard experience that past me was an idiot and
267.
by lolinder 1y ago
> This is not true for garbage collected languages JavaScript is backwards compatible going back effectively forever, as is Java. Rust's unique system is having a way to make breaking changes to the language without breaking old c
268.
by lolinder 1y ago
A simple version of this that already shines with existing LLMs is JSON Schema mode. You can go quite a long way towards making illegal states unrepresentable and then turn a model loose in the constrained sandbox, with the guarantee that a
269.
by lolinder 1y ago
> Do parliamentary democracies have this feature? I don't think so. And they are "truly democratic" in my book. I can't speak for all parliamentary elections, but in the UK MPs must be put to the vote at least once e
270.
by lolinder 1y ago
This. This is what I'm talking about. If you can't see it, nothing I will say can change it, but suffice it to say that I'm more convinced than ever that SO is culturally very sick. I'll just refer back to the key releva

More ›