rpdillon

3 ms·

1.
by rpdillon 5d ago
Yes, this is one of the central theses of the TV show "The Good Place". In simpler societies, it's easier to determine what is right and wrong, since actions are often local and can be judged on their immediate effects. But w
2.
by rpdillon 5d ago
> When I was in the US, I did actively attempt to diminish my tax contribution as much as legally possible I like how this is being spun as virtuous. When multinational trillion-dollar companies do it, we say it's bad!
3.
by rpdillon 5d ago
Right, and businesses need to pay for theirs.
4.
by rpdillon 5d ago
> I find it far more ironic that they are called Reclaim the Internet. That's the name of the site covering the block.
5.
by rpdillon 5d ago
Oh, I had considered it well-informed, but otherwise agree. You can't stand still in this industry.
6.
by rpdillon 5d ago
I'm just observing the incentives. There is a reason these licenses have not taken off, especially for nascent projects.
7.
by rpdillon 6d ago
> money, popularity, increasing adoption These are the currencies of the VC world, and many open source developers don't release their work for those reasons (myself included, limited though my contributions are). It seems strange t
8.
by rpdillon 6d ago
They won't do this, because starting out as non-free doesn't get the same traction. Now that I think about it, it's basically a form of enshitification: draw people in with one deal, then after they're onboard, change it
9.
by rpdillon 6d ago
People on HN have been claiming that LLMs are going to hit a wall any second now for the past two and a half years. To reiterate, this is the very beginning of a long series of technological expansions that are going to come out of GenAI. T
10.
by rpdillon 6d ago
> But if someone says "don't use them for X" for any number of other good reasons, that recommendation is often timeless. Are the good reasons timeless? I guess it's hard to parse what you're saying without some
11.
by rpdillon 6d ago
Yeah, his posting history isn't promising. He's been doing the "if you think you're as smart as an LLM, you're probably right" argument for a month now. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4931
12.
by rpdillon 6d ago
Have you missed their retractions of exactly those statements? https://fortune.com/2026/05/26/sam-altman-dario-amodei-walki...
13.
by rpdillon 6d ago
This is a shallow dismissal. You're claiming the frontier labs are lying about the capabilities of their next generation models. A reasonable person will expect that statement to be backed up by some verifiable evidence, given that we
14.
by rpdillon 6d ago
My mental model is that humans will continue to be needed. Many jobs will embed AI in them. Using AI well is a skill. I need to understand the technology, where it is strong and weak, and how it develops over time so I can employ it effecti
15.
by rpdillon 6d ago
You probably need a better speech-to-text system then. I type 90% of my comments on HN with FUTO keyboard, which is a local speech to text engine, and it handles capitalization properly most of the time. https://keyboard.futo.tec
16.
by rpdillon 6d ago
I kind of feel this way except I have a guy on my team that I actually really respect, that for some reason can't capitalize things. It's just one of those quirks I'm willing to work around because he's otherwise awesome
17.
by rpdillon 6d ago
I said people wanted credit more often than I had expected. You said "Way to straw man all counter arguments before they even got any." The current point you're making is (I think) that OSS devs don't want credit, they w
18.
by rpdillon 6d ago
I wouldn't say that wanting to contribute to a shared commons of cool stuff isn't a human motivation. And I'm not deriding those that build open source to boost their own reputation. I'm just much less interested in thei
19.
by rpdillon 6d ago
Context: I was accused of raising a strawman argument. I was explaining that I don't think it's a strawman, and your comment suggests you agree. It's a perfectly good reason, but I lament the loss of people who are doing open
20.
by rpdillon 6d ago
Completely agree that low-value pull requests and bug reports are a problem, but that's not a problem with AI. That's a problem with people using GitHub and trying to do collaborative development in an ungated environment. Free so
21.
by rpdillon 6d ago
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. I put trust in individual people, not organizations. You seem to be making a point about supply chains, but I'm not sure how it relates to the point about trust. You seem to be m
22.
by rpdillon 6d ago
Something where the person that is going to be using it can't easily define the full set of requirements in one go because they're going to need to interact with it first, and subsequent requirements will emerge after use. The lim
23.
by rpdillon 6d ago
And every person I talk to has a different take. In one case, it's that you don't respect the brand and you're lazy and you're cheap. In another, it's that you're signaling your values. Maybe the reality is a l
24.
by rpdillon 6d ago
Trusting software produced by others is not a new problem; I consider AI to be a tool, and so my techniques for establishing trust are the same as they have always been. I look at the person wielding the tool.
25.
by rpdillon 6d ago
I haven't heard any coherent arguments other than getting credit and building a portfolio. Are there others?
26.
by rpdillon 6d ago
You say that sharing the software is the ultimate goal, but you're using that argument to justify not sharing your software. That's hard for me to understand. I also don't think that just because you have to ask AI to write t
27.
by rpdillon 6d ago
It's not really about that, and it's not really a dunk, and it doesn't derail anything as far as I can tell. What we're discussing is the magnitude of the impact of the sorts of errors that AI makes in promotional materi
28.
by rpdillon 6d ago
Yes, that clause hinges on both parties trusting the FSF to adhere to free software principles. So far this has been an extremely good assumption.
29.
by rpdillon 6d ago
> If you want to gatekeep or only create stuff to boost your own ego or portfolio, then AI might be an issue, if you actually want to build stuff, AI is godsend. Exactly this. I've been very confused by the free software advocates t
30.
by rpdillon 6d ago
You're using rhetoric to try and change the subject -- you're making a jump from "good value" to "lack of quality", and painting them with the same brush. I'm saying I don't particularly value busines

More ›