pembrook

7 ms·

61.
by pembrook 3mo ago
I see these conspiratorial arguments all the time and I think people massively overestimate the value of the average users tokens. The problems with frontier models (design taste, ability to solve novel/difficult problems, etc) cannot
62.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Agreed, but the days of software projects being ambitious or impressive are over.
63.
by pembrook 3mo ago
By ambitious and impressive do you mean for Claude? Because while cool this is clearly heavily vibe coded.
64.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Because markets in the short term are almost a random walk and making the blanket statement that “Walmart stock is down today because Deepseek” was an easy narrative to repeat for media people who cover the stock market. In reality the worl
65.
by pembrook 3mo ago
This is a red herring. We're not arguing about whether it is standard for governments to attempt to exercise maximal control. We're arguing about whether governments executing censorship regimes via ISPs (like the Chinese Communis
66.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Yes exactly my point...so it sounds like you're admitting this "availability of porn leading to action" theory isn't a very good one? And that in fact it leads to less action given it satisfies urges at much lower cost.
67.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Does it need to be said that by making all pornography easier to access the internet obviously makes rape pornography more prevalent and easier to access as well? Hence your theory should be easily visible in rape statistics, yet it’s the o
68.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Yes, it’s an argument but there’s zero data to support it, in fact the opposite. If this were true then widespread availability of pornography on the internet would have resulted in a massive increase in rape of adult females. When in fact,
69.
by pembrook 3mo ago
It totally could be illegal, and I don’t care. Those laws exist to entrench dominant incumbents, and make our economy less dynamic. The history of Silicon Valley and most of its innovation come from this kind of thing, and we eliminated non
70.
by pembrook 3mo ago
I’m a huge fan of Apple but this kind of thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Regardless of whether OpenAI poached some of their talent or is the one in the wrong, Apple has such a massively dominant hardware business (some might say monop
71.
by pembrook 3mo ago
To me this feels like the Japanese soldier stuck on the island still fighting the old war a decade after it ended. Thanks for repeating the moral panic narrative for me, it’s exactly what I am talking about. All your complaints have nothing
72.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Yes, if the US was modeled like the USSR they could extract 100% of everyone’s private assets and the politburo could spend them on whatever moonshot projects they wanted to, unchecked by silly democratic votes. But…the USSR and that entire
73.
by pembrook 3mo ago
In an earlier phase of AI I might have agreed but now the publicly available data they’ve trained on is increasingly useless for the frontier. RL/post-training is now a much bigger part of it, with that being largely proprietary and ex
74.
by pembrook 3mo ago
How charming. A young, authoritarian-minded elitist aiming to force their views onto the rest of us 'stupid sheep'...with the implicit threat of a gun to the head via the state's monopoly on violence. Have you ever examined t
75.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Not great tbh. The more time goes on, I'm starting to come around to paypal's original vision of decentralized internet-native money as being the future. The more the international system breaks down and countries abuse their powe
76.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Yes, and as with everything humans do as a mob, the pendulum tends to swing way too far in whatever direction the memes are trending. We saw Erin Brokovich and then proceeded to block the building of literally everything. But it turns out t
77.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Hate to confront you with reality, but if you're in the US, 95% of the infrastructure around you was built in a world prior to the sham obstructionist cudgel of "environmental impact studies" even existed. So the answer is no
78.
by pembrook 3mo ago
The factory comparison is a moot point. This isn't about taxation. Do you think the people hysterically screaming about a data center being built within a 500 mile radius of them would be okay with you building something that uses even
79.
by pembrook 3mo ago
And they will, because Texas allows building. Question, how do you think the entire infrastructure around you that you’ve taken for granted your whole life was built? If you were asked, would you have voted to allow the building of your own
80.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Yes and I’m not arguing against the theory, I’m arguing against the reality of how governments actually work in practice. (Hint: they aren’t perfect) The worlds worst atrocities; genocides, mass murder on the scale of millions, Mao’s Great
81.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Yes and commercial entities aren’t some absolute evil constantly repressing us either. Both government and private entities have checks on their power in the form of voting (government) or in the case of commercial entities, the market itse
82.
by pembrook 3mo ago
When you grant the government more control over the world to supposedly “protect” you, unfortunately those powers aren’t always wielded by people you would have voted for. But this is often fine if there’s real harm there. Eliminating the h
83.
by pembrook 3mo ago
This is the same EU commission pushing chat control and VPN bans and passports to access the internet. Which people on HN hate. Yet, when they couch authoritarian action under the premise of a popular moral panic, suddenly the reaction here
84.
by pembrook 3mo ago
> are addicted to social media and have to take psychiatric medication for it. I’m sorry but this is just not real. There’s not a single non-quack doctor who will recommend psychiatric medication for “social media addiction,” which is
85.
by pembrook 3mo ago
> power cannot be destroyed, only transferred...someone is going to have power over all sorts of aspects of your life I fully agree with this, but that someone doesn't need to be a 3rd party centralized entity (like a government o
86.
by pembrook 3mo ago
This is actually a fantastic example of the blindspot I'm talking about. You fundamentally are unable to judge risk correctly due to your political bias. You're even admitting the risk of companies harvesting data is that it may f
87.
by pembrook 3mo ago
So your position is that, because Coca Cola once funded paramilitary action in South America...companies are a worse threat to us than governments? You don't seem able to hold two ideas in your head. Yes, companies can abuse their powe
88.
by pembrook 3mo ago
Oh the horror, they might try to lower your salary forcing you to find another competing employer! Meanwhile governments wield enough power to destroy the entire world 100X over, and are currently shoveling young boys into the meat grinder
89.
by pembrook 3mo ago
> Your comment seems to frame this as a "two sides issue" as if it was a see-saw and you can only move back and forth between one side and the other with no room for nuance or alternate directions. No. My point is you should
90.
by pembrook 3mo ago
The root issue is still government having absurdly asymmetric power over you. If the government weren't legally able to use the toilet bowl cleaner companies data against you, it wouldn't matter. The problem is us giving governm

More ›