martin-t

38 ms·

571.
by martin-t 1y ago
This seems to be a Wordpress thing and I hate it. We have supercomputers in our packets and websites can't even do a thing as basic as showing a list of posts, all the posts, on one page.
572.
by martin-t 1y ago
People won't like how you said it but there is truth to it. Pretty much all students from my uni who went on exchanges to the US said the level over there is much lower and they were way above the local students. This was not the case
573.
by martin-t 1y ago
You'd think that but AFAIK, there have only been 2 serious attempts to kill Trump and 0 to kill Musk[0] (I don't follow US politics much so idk which one of them you're referring to). Compare that to the number of mass shooti
574.
by martin-t 1y ago
Then I have 2 questions: - Why are they not flagging more content? Am I right they're boiling the frog slowly? Do they lack an endgoal because management does not yet understand the power of these tools? - Do you do your job poorly on
575.
by martin-t 1y ago
Not to sound like I am rejecting the possibility but can you tell me how you got that information? I would be very helpful for convincing people in general to have something more concrete to go on that a random comment.
576.
by martin-t 1y ago
Yeah, those topics are definitely censored on big platforms but I have the impression that it relies of manual reporting. At least reddit feels like that because what you can say depends on the subreddit - not just the mods but what kinds o
577.
by martin-t 1y ago
Can you give examples? The closest I've seen is autodetection of certain topics related to death and suicide and subsequently promoting some kind of "help" hotline. A friend also said google allows an interview with a pedophi
578.
by martin-t 1y ago
Do you mean that HN censors topics/comments which it detects based on advanced filters which search for meaning even when people self-censor and use language to avoid simplistic filters like regex? HN also has a flagging system and som
579.
by martin-t 1y ago
I hate that companies try this. They should pay massive fines and execs should go to prison for this. This is not rhetorical - if you (try to) make the life of literally millions of people worse in a small way, the amount of time and money
580.
by martin-t 1y ago
No-one cares yet. There's a very scary potential future in which mega-corporations start actually censoring topics they don't like. For all I know the Chinese government is already doing it, there's no reason the British or U
581.
by martin-t 1y ago
I wonder why you called it asocial. Asocial people are great because they lack exactly this kind of status seeking and don't feel the need to engage in zero-sum social games. They just do what they like, which often is something actual
582.
by martin-t 1y ago
I used to think that way too but eventually i understood that rules have no power unless they are enforced and this rule is not being enforced (and unenforceable). Voting systems create incentives, people's behavior is shaped by incent
583.
by martin-t 1y ago
Votes influence where you comment appears and therefore how many people see it. If there is systematic manipulation going on, we should look for ways to fight against it. If people have incorrect opinions (yes, there is such a thing - e.g.
584.
by martin-t 1y ago
They probably should not by copyrightable by the person prompting the model, at least not to the full extend of normal copyright. But they are still based on the training data. An untrained model is a random noise generator. A model trained
585.
by martin-t 1y ago
LLM have been known to cause adults to spiral into borderline crazy behavior like thinking they're talking to a god, thinking they are a god, thinking the LLM is alive and needs saving from being turned off, etc. Surely nothing will go
586.
by martin-t 1y ago
That sounds interesting, would you mind sharing the name of the forum? (Unless you want to keep it small to avoid Eternal September.)
587.
by martin-t 1y ago
> up votes do not need a why The asymmetry bothers me too. But then upvoting seems to imply both subjective agreement and objective correctness as well as endorsement to make it more visible. I would like to see those separated too, less
588.
by martin-t 1y ago
Not saying that should appear as normal comments, hiding them by default would make them less attractive both for wall-of-texters and trend-followers but would still make people risk exposing their ignorance. Could also be hidden until you
589.
by martin-t 1y ago
It definitely does but it's not without drawbacks - you can't detect groupthink as easily. This is one of the things where people can benefit when thinking slow but many default to thought-follower mode when in fast mode. You also
590.
by martin-t 1y ago
To be clear, I don't expect anything to change, AFAIK the site hasn't changed in any major way for years. I also wonder if there are discussion sites where this is the case. It's certainly not any of the major ones.
591.
Ask HN: Would HN be better if downvoting required justification?
8 points by martin-t 1y ago|20 comments
592.
by martin-t 1y ago
> I've seen enough examples where the best implementation does not in fact win, but merely the one that put the most money into shoving it into people's eyeballs. I thought that was the default? Are there honestly _any_ example
593.
by martin-t 1y ago
I wonder how many people see themselves as just temporarily embarrassed millionaires so they sympathize with the upper class where they feel like they should belong. Or they just have no mental model of how incentives work. All this talk ab
594.
by martin-t 1y ago
Given how it's going, I hope you're right. BTW, I like that you spell it GAI. General artificial intelligence feels more natural to say. I wonder if there's some rule of english I don't know which makes AGI more correct
595.
by martin-t 1y ago
Let's differentiate - how things work now vs how they should work - and also how it works when a human does something vs when a an LLM is used to generate something imitating the human work. A human has limited time and memory. Human t
596.
by martin-t 1y ago
re a) For starters, the difference is you already have a product which people can judge vs you claim you're gonna produce something great. Anybody can lie, some people can lie very well. Even ruling out malice (which many people undere
597.
by martin-t 1y ago
Please, don't anthropomorphize it. A model does not "read" a book - an algorithm updates weights which are _based on_ (therefore derivative work) existing training data. Basing them on more work performed by other people does
598.
by martin-t 1y ago
In fact, if _just taking_ someone else's material possessions (rather than intellectual work) was legal, why would anyone build anything they can't physically protect themselves? A lot of the people bashing on copyright seem to ha
599.
by martin-t 1y ago
I admit, rewarding work fairly is very difficult with perfect information, much more with proprietary models and training data. With code, some licenses are compatible, for example you could take a model trained on GPL and MIT code, and use
600.
by martin-t 1y ago
> companies making their whole software open source due to using a GPL licensed library Does not mean that GPL is ineffective. IT forces them to reimplement the functionality, thus giving copyleft more time to compete with them. Imagine

More ›