piker

17 ms·

301.
by piker 8mo ago
Better?
302.
by piker 8mo ago
Then can you take yourselves back to Reddit or something? This used to be an interesting place to visit that was differentiated from other “hot take” havens on the net.
303.
by piker 8mo ago
Flagged this. As much as I also love to dunk on Microsoft, this kind of crapware is not the way to do it. [I personally] don’t want this on the front page. [And I think others should join me in that belief. Let’s try to keep it a place for
304.
by piker 8mo ago
Ok, but I thought my analysis was pretty clear on that point: > OpenAI acceded to demands that the US Government can do whatever it wants that is legal.
305.
by piker 8mo ago
I’m so exhausted by all the thought leadership from AI company executives. Can you just market a product without a meta discussion on how things are changing so rapidly and where they’re headed? Or better yet, use those legions of agents to
306.
by piker 8mo ago
Sorry, I think we may be talking past each other. The language you quoted is an objective standard. If, for example, a court ruled that the government had violated the Constitution using the tool, that language would be breached. I don’t th
307.
by piker 8mo ago
True. Why even bother with school anyway?
308.
by piker 8mo ago
My money is on extraordinarily poor final exam results and/or cheating.
309.
by piker 8mo ago
No, the usage has to be consistent with all three according to this provision.
310.
by piker 8mo ago
This is the correct reading.
311.
by piker 8mo ago
No, that is incorrect. This is an objective standard as a matter of contract interpretation. If it was the government’s right to determine the lawfulness of a usage, it would say so. Perhaps it does elsewhere in the agreement, but that’s n
312.
by piker 8mo ago
It certainly was intended as such. In a commercial transaction, that's what they're doing. They don't think it's moral to use their product in certain ways. They are thus prohibiting their customer from using it in such
313.
by piker 8mo ago
No, I'm not taking the government's side. I'm telling the government's side. That's probably true that the executive branch can't do those things, but it may be able to do so in the future. Thus, Anthropic&#x27
314.
by piker 8mo ago
That's a fair point, and I'm not so much defending sama's statements after the fact but rather trying to rationalize the OpenAI position.
315.
by piker 8mo ago
Right, which is probably the point made by the negotiators on behalf of the US Government. "We don't want Anthropic's standard, we want the Constitution."
316.
by piker 8mo ago
Yes, I think that would be the idea. Again, not my view, but we give police officers license to use lethal force and often the victims of their abuse of that power have no recourse because they're already dead.
317.
by piker 8mo ago
That view does seem to be consistent with Anthropic's. It's sad if true, since it implies a belief that the system cannot be just in modern contexts.
318.
by piker 8mo ago
That depends on whether you view the cited authorities as already prohibiting that usage. I don't have an opinion on that, but some folks on both sides of the isle might have strong arguments that they do.
319.
by piker 8mo ago
> The Department of War may use the AI System for all lawful purposes, consistent with applicable law, operational requirements, and well-established safety and oversight protocols. The AI System will not be used to independently direct
320.
by piker 8mo ago
> no permissions at all > and maybe a browser does not compute
321.
by piker 8mo ago
I find myself totally agreeing with the quoted text and also this sentiment. It just makes no sense to nuke Anthropic as a negotiation tactic if your interest is in preserving the republic long term.
322.
by piker 8mo ago
This is the part I don't understand. It's like sharing a finger painting half the time. Yes, cool, but so what? [Edit: no need for the downvote, folks, it was an honest question although it seemed otherwise. I think the answers be
323.
by piker 8mo ago
Yes, that is surprising. Though I think modern Office has always struggled on macOS.
324.
by piker 8mo ago
Running Claude Code from a phone just seems like a recipe for Alzheimer’s. Rest, then focus and build.
325.
by piker 8mo ago
A lot of good behind this idea if nothing else than to keep Microsoft honest. The Azureware push is nauseating and such a transparent attempt to lock in its monopoly against disruptors. We’re hoping Tritium[1] can provide a free or commerci
326.
by piker 8mo ago
I suggest you read the annotation if that question isn't just rhetorical. I'm not familiar with Ed, but he has a pretty good take down in here if you can get past his somewhat juvenile writing style. It is a problem when your doom
327.
by piker 8mo ago
Well for an expats, it's really a gamechanger not having to play three card monte selecting the correct card to use for each transaction. You would be surprised how many transactions are (accidentally?) geofenced based on where your ca
328.
by piker 8mo ago
Not at all! That is my drafting method creeping through. I try to write each sentence as a separate paragraph first to make sure I don’t get too wed to a paragraph and can delete/move liberally. Then I try to go and merge the paragraph
329.
by piker 8mo ago
Presumably Australia where he’s from, but also possible in the U.S.
330.
by piker 8mo ago
Lines up with the current YC advice to "make something agents want". Not sure it makes a lot of sense to try and build a VC-backed business like this, but if distribution is the moat these days, perhaps.

More ›