unknownfuture

6 ms·

61.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Not sure what your point is? Those things can both be true. Or should the discourse in a diverse community like HN only reflect the positions you personally hold?
62.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
This shouldn't even be a question: the operators of those agents must be held accountable. There may not be established precedent but there exists established law. And if there's ambiguity, then fine, legislate. But there can be n
63.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Uh, non-profits absolutely may have unionized employees: https://npeu.org/ I... wonder if you don't know what a non-profit corporation is or how they work?
64.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Honestly it's hard to blame folks. The US (and Canada, where I'm from) has seen a 40+ year concerted effort to destroy unions and the propaganda runs deep. There's been a long-running cultural project to depict unions as pure
65.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Look I'm not going to teach you about the entire history of labor relations and the role of unions. But rest assured that this isn't some new, unique moment in history. The exact same questions could have been raised during the in
66.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Literally demonstrating the point in dofm's second paragraph right here...
67.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
I can only assume you aren't paying attention to, and aren't personally experiencing, the impact of AI on the industry. Power has shifted dramatically in favour of the ownership class in the last couple of years. That's preci
68.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Vibecoding == digital dowsing?
69.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Ehhhh, it's better at some things and not others. My own reviews have shifted now. I tend not to examine detailed semantics anymore. The AI is as good or better than me at assessing whether a chunk of code does what the author said it
70.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Yes. They know what you meant. You missed the point of their response. A compiler is semantically deterministic. It has a spec. Give it an input and you can know exactly what the output will do. And if there's edge cases where behaviou
71.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
> There's an entire profession doing that: traders. Well no, there's an entire profession trying to time the market. The data is not favourable as to their ability to actually do it at a rate greater than random chance. But.
72.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
The problem is the old saw about the market staying irrational. You can't time the market reliably. Ultimately the base advice remains sound even if it's couched in a bit of conspiracy: diversify and allocate your assets based on
73.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Read more carefully. I didn't say any of that. "Rich people hang out together and influence each other" isn't, in fact, a conspiracy, it's demonstrable fact.
74.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Thing about offhand comments from random guys like Lutke is a) they're born of the cultural pool in which he's swimming, which is made up of many other very influential rich guys, and b) they have the power and influence to actual
75.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Maybe try reading the article instead of scanning it. Its neither ranting nor rambling, nor is it complaining or making excuses. It pokes holes in common patterns around agentic coding (e.g. SDD, TDD, etc) and identifies two interesting new
76.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Lol because that never happens on any other OS. Plug my Mac into my dock, uses my DAC. Great. Unplug. Connect Bluetooth headphones. So far so good. Plug back into dock. Now it's... the built in audio? Huh? I'm honestly surprised h
77.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
NeXT itself, as a company, was absolutely a failure. That Apple came along and bought them and stripped them for parts is certainly convenient for Jobs, but doesn't change that, had they continued on their own, it would've ended u
78.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
They would if they cared to invest in it. That they've not is a policy and economic choice (possibly because they don't have the same sense of panicked urgency I see among a lot of folks around here), not evidence of some insurmou
79.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
> The keyword in your sentence is "access". The rest of the world would have cheap access to AI, but no ownership of anything at the frontier. So... just use distillation and create their own frontier models? I don't see t
80.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
Eh, even if we take those mythologized examples as real (I'd argue the history of both is heavily whitewashed and their failues, like NeXT or Windows Phone to name just two, are papered over in their mythmaking), if anything they'
81.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
I don't see a reason to believe any CEO, past or present, has had the ability to accurately predict the future. Luck and foresight look the same when you happen to get it right.
82.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
> I am waiting for a precedent on this one. In general, training on copyrighted material is legal, there is a lot of precedent there. But every now and then there is a case where the owner of the training material wins. You're makin
83.
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
> You should aim to be working on one project at a time in your team. You're swimming against the tide with this. AI pilled management is driving teams to deliver more parallel workstreams, not fewer, with fewer, AI-augmented devs
84.
by unknownfuture 3mo ago
And now I know you either don't understand what an economy of scale is or you're not discussing in good faith. Carry on!
85.
by unknownfuture 3mo ago
All of those industries benefited and continue to benefit from economies of scale in the manufacturing and delivery of their products. You're not making the case you think you are, and I have a suspicion the article's point is jus
86.
by unknownfuture 3mo ago
Yup. We're just all re-learning Amdahl's Law.
87.
by unknownfuture 3mo ago
That's still not the kind of efficiency the article is talking about. They're referring to raw training and inference scaling and it's relationship (or lack thereof) to traditional economies of scale that we've seen with
88.
by unknownfuture 3mo ago
1.5B settlement where they admitted no wrongdoing and are indemnified? They burn 5B per year . If an individual did the same their lives would be destroyed. It's just another case of a corporation breaking the law and paying a fine as
89.
by unknownfuture 3mo ago
> This is obviously untrue so either the author is knowingly lying or is plain incompetent. We had LLMs not being able to do simple high school mathematics a year back, now it is solving open problems in mathematics. Fields medalists in
90.
by unknownfuture 3mo ago
> I mean, that is the essence of how to fix the problems in a capitalist society? So... we're just gonna forget that governments exist? We gonna assume rivers would've stopped burning in the US if only there had just been more

More ›