Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | outime's commentslogin

If I had to guess, the last paragraph of your original comment comes across as very harsh.

I don't see it. I made a remark that nice-to-haves are less important than the bare essentials. And I don't get how this quasi-commercial product doesn't have this locked in, despite them making an every effort to come off as polished.

Also in Spain, specially in the Basque country, you pick pintxos from the counter and at the end they just count the "skewers" left on the plate.

The harm may be greater when it's not leaked. In other words, it can be used to blackmail people in power. They may not even be doing anything particularly illegal - just making a controversial statement or having an unusual sexual preference - and there you go. Or of course illegal stuff, you know. Or ultimately if nothing illegal, enough to assemble a parallel construction case.


At the end of the day, the only guaranteed way to retain access to LLMs is to run an open model on your own hw. Which at this time, it's often inferior but may change in the future.

Also, I'll never be grateful enough for all the horror stories about Google accounts getting randomly banned - they were what finally pushed me to make a similar move.


I personally don't think there are many people left yelling "conspiracy" when you say that globalized decisions are being pushed, especially if you've been alive for the last 10 years. Nowadays it's more about who is actually making these decisions and that discussion gets muddy quickly.


Global meetings (whether secret or not) where select people decide what to do next to minimize potential threats to their power. There isn't much more to it, really.


Not just minimize threats, but often to maximize their power.

Lobbyists do not just try to convince a politician that X is a good idea. Lobbyists give the politician money to introduce already drafted legislation, and then give other politicians money to support it. And if they can get the legislation passed in one place, they'll try it again.

The result is that suspiciously similar legislation appears in many places close in time, due to it being pushed by particular interests.


I'm not convinced this is about money as much as it is about blackmail, given how centralized data collection has become and how many intelligence agencies appear to have access to numerous 0-days for routinely gathering additional information. It could be both things as well.

What bothers me most isn't their corruption, but their apparent belief that it won't eventually affect them or their families - perhaps sooner than they think.


I feel the exact same way. Haven't those government officials who voted for these laws ever considered that, one day, their own family members or closest friends might appear on a leaked list on the dark net? I don't believe these officials can exempt themselves from data breaches. Even if they maintain high-standard personal security, what about their loved ones? Unless they remain lonely and single for their entire lives, this double-edged sword will eventually backfire on them.


That apparent belief is common. People with current access to power, seldom anticipate what might happen in the future if it is turned against them.


Or ... perform the calculus that however bad it might be for them, the differential power gain remains in their favour.

Power is ordinal far more than it is cardinal. Ranking matters more than absolute values.


There's a limit to every city, and just building new infrastructure won't solve everything. It always lags behind demand and there are space constraints, budget constraints and countless other limitations.

At the same time, expectations keep rising for everyone (myself included): not wanting to spend one or two hours commuting to work, not wanting to live 45 minutes away from a large supermarket and not wanting to spend three hours or more just to meet friends or family among others. The problem is that it simply doesn't scale, and every country/city faces different challenges so there is no single universal solution.

I'm afraid the real discussion can't happen outside of small circles at this time because it'd involve highly controversial topics that much of the population in Western democracies (can only talk about what I know) isn't ready to confront. We have deeply ingrained ideas that are difficult to challenge so instead we'll probably watch cities fully collapse before anything.


What makes you think our current cities are anywhere close to the limit you propose?


It's just HN's Two Minutes Hate (extended). It's wise to filter out stuff that's too hot for too long on this site to focus on interesting stuff, as at this point nuanced views aren't to be found.


Are you asking whether software that's been actively developed has changed since the last time you used it 15-20 years ago? I'd be wary of holding a grudge against something for so long.


Codex for open source stored in GitHub*


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: