teiferer

29 ms·

751.
by teiferer 1y ago
Nice to see that you are still around with this after your https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45448525 was flagged because of LLM slop issues of your work. How are you addressing those?
752.
by teiferer 1y ago
> we should euthanize another human You are shiftinf the topic. This is about self-euthanization, assisted suicide. Not others. > Where do we draw the line? As written elsewhere, having to draw a line does not mean that the only reas
753.
by teiferer 1y ago
And that's what makes it a hard topic. Because you need to draw a line, and everybody will have opinions about the line's position. Rightfully. But it being a hard topic does not imply the easy solution of banning it.
754.
by teiferer 1y ago
Yes, everybody should be interested in getting them treatment, just like they are interested in getting people treatment who have leukemia, were born with a malfunctioning liver or need an artificial hip. Instead, they get thrown in prison
755.
by teiferer 1y ago
> it totally sours everyone's view of you. That's just as much failure of everybody as it is of him. This was dementia speaking and society needs to learn that. You wouldn't tell somebody with a broken leg to get it togeth
756.
by teiferer 1y ago
Yeah, it was a facade. That facade fell in 2001. (I'm not saying this was good. It was a terrible tragedy. The attack itself obviously, and then what followed as well.)
757.
by teiferer 1y ago
Don't get me wrong, I'm not justifying the fake content. What I'm trying to justify is a discussion about the implications of such fake content.
758.
by teiferer 1y ago
A bit sad that this is flagged. Sure it's likely fake, but I like the beginning discussion around that. Those discussions are important too.
759.
by teiferer 1y ago
> Ending all school programs that separate children by ability is the most radically egalitarian position possible, even in theory. There is no more extreme position one can take. There are many things I can imagine that are much more ra
760.
by teiferer 1y ago
Buying more land, building more housing to ultimately charge rent would definitely be good for everybody. The housing crisis is a supply side shortage and every dollar going into building new rentals would alleviate that pressure. Instead,
761.
by teiferer 1y ago
If this was true universally then the total amount monetary value in the economy was constant, apart from the feds printing some. But it's not. Value comes and goes. You can definitely lose money without it going elsewhere.
762.
by teiferer 1y ago
You provided a perfect example for why: > a subject about which I know a lot more about than the average person here True or not, expressing it like that is just arrogant.
763.
by teiferer 1y ago
> they are an extreme net good for the ecosystem. Evidence? Perhaps depends on what you mean with "ecosystem". Within the AI tech/hype, sure, there it's good. But for the economy as a whole? Is it that good? There
764.
by teiferer 1y ago
> Yes, and??? How is that relevant Because it describes exactly the point which GGP tried to make (source: that was me). The assumption is that AI growth is great because without it, look at how low the non-AI growth is! But that argumen
765.
by teiferer 1y ago
Not so sad. I'm working in an area that is AI adjacent. We don't use AI for anything and the tech we build is not only useful for AI companies. So we'll live when that busts and we don't directly contribute to the hype.
766.
by teiferer 1y ago
I hear you man. Didn't intend to paint a rosy image of hard working landscapers. What I meant was do it more like a hobby that pays a little on the side. Doesn't have to be much, just pay some bills and let me do sth I like. Cause
767.
by teiferer 1y ago
> It makes me want to move into something completely different like sales I'm feeling the same. The moves I'm considering are 1. Landscaping 2. Carpentry 3. Small scale agriculture (All made easier by a cushion of investments t
768.
by teiferer 1y ago
> absent the AI boom we would probably have lower interest rates [and] electricity prices, thus some additional growth in other sectors. In other words, the AI hype comes at the cost of lower growth rates in other sectors of the economy?
769.
by teiferer 1y ago
Not disagreeing with you, but isn't that already obvious from the fact that economic activity happens in the first place? If you buy 5 apples from me for $5 then two things must be true: 1. The value that those 5 apples have to you ex
770.
by teiferer 1y ago
> that costs them essentially nothing If you know how to run such a platform for free, then I'm sure you could sell your knowledge for a lot of money. And the company running chess.com would be your highest paying customer. In other
771.
by teiferer 1y ago
Thanks for pointing that out. I've spent a little too much time today engaging in such debate on HN and should reconsider.
772.
by teiferer 1y ago
Oh I'm not disagreeing. Forcing boredom is not the way. But preventing it at all costs may not be either.
773.
by teiferer 1y ago
There wasn't much directed learning. We played all day. Indoors building stuff, outdoors in the woods. All that academic material with reading and writing and maths and all that, that's what primary school was for. Which started a
774.
by teiferer 1y ago
Though I don't think that's the argument. Even those advocating for the end of the program for gifted kids don't believe that all children have the same natural ability. Maybe some of them do, but the main arguments are diffe
775.
by teiferer 1y ago
So like Windows then? Cause a free alternative exists? Or farmers markets? Cause you can just grow all those crops for free yourself. Or carpenters? Just get some tools, do your home renovations for free. Or sex workers? Cause you can just
776.
by teiferer 1y ago
Idk man, your definition of "scam" seems different from other people's. "Old rope"? Is every non-EV a scam because it's "old rope"? Are people with cable TV subscriptions victims of scams because cabl
777.
by teiferer 1y ago
Maybe it's because I'm old and things are different now, but back in the day, first year of primary school was when everybody learned to read. Some kids already knew some (incl. me), and that didn't necessarily make life easi
778.
by teiferer 1y ago
> radical Really? Why is everything called "radical" nowadays? The "radical left" who want healthcare for everybody, the "radical right" who oppose immigration. Radical egalitarianism? Really? Because they d
779.
by teiferer 1y ago
Not necessarily a good idea. Dealing with disagreements, distractions, conflicts, low and high performers around you, that's all part of social education. It's not explicitly on the curriculum, but if you just give everybody a sup
780.
by teiferer 1y ago
> Even if you’re a blank slater who believes ability is evenly distributed, and a pure egalitarian who sees any demographic imbalance as injustice, even then, why destroy programs that benefit some children? Because the benefit of one is

More ›