9rx

That reads more like the second half of the original comment, while this discussion, as quoted, has clearly always about the first bit: "Using AI to fake posting activity is bad." Let's not change the subject. A discussion cannot be had if you start inventing new context out of the blue.

In an effort to try to desperately salvage your salon analogy, this is like the salon showing photos of wigs and you becoming upset foolishly thinking it was someone's natural hair even though you like what the wig looks like and it has inspired your next, not so ugly haircut. Why is that so upsetting? If you really don't like what you see, why not move on and go the other salon next door? What is to be gained from crying over a business?

Right. Your new hairdo comes into question because we trusted you to look good, which is why we wanted to be around you, and you violated that trust. However, it is your hair to fashion as you please, no? What is the significance of us complaining about how you are now ugly? What does it mean in the grand scheme of things? What makes it more than idle gossip that will be completely forgotten next week?

It is never most people you need to worry about.

> if someone needs to use throwaways to post negatively polarized statements on HN

If it were only read by other HN users who understand that a user account is not a human then it wouldn't matter, but the world is not so simple. There are people, who do not understand that forum accounts are not humans, who are working hard to associate internet activity with humans and will use it against them.

Of course, we already know how to identify individuals by their writing style, so a throwaway account probably isn't the screen the OP hopes it is. Still, it is the best source of making it as difficult as possible we seemingly have.

A good product is a good product. The implementation details don't matter.

There is complaint, like someone complaining that they don't like your new haircut, but it is ultimately not their haircut to worry about. How is your apparent poor choice in style a problem to the onlooker?

That's fine. We can't all know everything. But why are you trying to participate in a discussion, by your own admission, you don't understand?

Okay. I'll be extremely generous and let you prove that with just a single frame. https://www.dexerto.com/cdn-image/wp-content/uploads/2024/02...

Rules:

- You have 2 seconds.

- No machine learning (e.g. content-aware fill) allowed.

- Result must remove the distraction of the ad, not replace it with something equally distracting. Blurs, black squares, etc. not accepted.

- Video recording of the process provided in a follow up reply.

Go!

Or maybe you still think we're in the 1950s when there were explicit ad breaks? In modern works ads are injected into the storyline. You can't just start dropping frames at random if you want to preserve the performance in its entirety.

I already hear your wheels turning, thinking machine learning will provide a way to remove the ads from the content, but as the AI labs start to control all the compute they will assuredly insert their own ads into what you tried to remove.

Perhaps you can interpret Jobs' statement that way in a vacuum, but fortunately we don't need to evaluate what Jobs' said in a vacuum. He also said a lot of other things that allow us to build up context around his intent. He spoke a lot about how he found his love.

But drugs allow one to remove themselves from society, which is far more appealing.

And this is the ultimate downfall of a suit. When jeans and t-shirts start to show wear then they transition from street clothes to work clothes and continue to live a useful life. As for suits, well, having a tie dangling around machinery isn't the best combo. Not even during peak suit did people wear them in the field.

Much more likely is that software engineering goes the way of the elevator operator. Advancements in technology saw the number of elevator operators explode, to the point that we've all become one!

Unfortunately for those wishing to make a living as an elevator operator, due to the properties of supply and demand, us all joining the ranks of elevator operator means that supply is effectively unlimited and thus price cratered to effectively zero. This is the real risk to software engineers, at least those who are in it for the money.

The cure for high prices is high prices.

Given what you said about Go, presumably that is Solod (https://solod.dev)

Actions speak louder than words.

Except in this case it's a gas station that only exists for the benefit of its owners and there isn't any food for sale. The owners have graciously said you could still use the microwave if you'd like, though.

Exactly. Representatives are merely messengers, so they can only represent the consumers when sharing the message of the consumers to the extent that the consumers have already recognized. Furthermore, representatives are only consumers themselves, so even if you imagine them not as representatives but dictators who step up and act for the people based on how they believe the people want to be overseen rather than from working with citizens they still have all the same blind spots.

> Great! Where can I find me one of those?

Where consumers don't like protecting the market incumbents. But, make no mistake, consumers love nothing more than protecting market incumbents. It gives them something to complain about when idly chatting with each other. Great? Something tells me you wouldn't find it great at all.

In a democracy, consumers and the government are the exact same thing. Since they ostensibly do not understand all of the potential ways in which they can be screwed over, how is calling themselves government going to magically change that? Maybe you are imagining a dictatorship instead, where the government is only a subset of all consumers, but even then the dictators are still just feeble consumers themselves remaining within the subset of all consumers. Being a dictator doesn't make you omniscient; still only human like all the others.

Government exists to clean up the outliers who are not behaving in line with the wishes of the consumers, but that cleanup can only occur when their undesirable behaviour is out there for all to plainly see. You cannot enforce what you don't recognize.

> consumers will have to choose between e.g privacy violation or environmental destruction, or privacy violation of some degree vs another degree.

Temporarily, perhaps, but in a functioning market one of those consumers feeling underserved will rise up to offer what's missing, eventually satisfying consumers again. However, ironically, consumers often consider that undesirable behaviour and use government to block that rising from occurring. For some reason consumers prefer to protect the market incumbents even when they claim to not like what the incumbents are doing.

Not really. No sign of a phone. Just a computer — same as what all other servers run on.

"My server runs on a computer with a form factor that is atypical for server workloads" gets a little closer to the heart of the article, but even then it seems the real meat of it is about Android, not the hardware (although that is mentioned too).

How about "My server runs on Android"?

Has coding ever meant anything else? This is just semantics, but I don't think a product person talking to customers to find out what they need has ever considered their work to be coding, even if the fruits of their discovery eventually ends up as code.

> Code was always the medium

Exactly. If you discovered that what the customer really needed was a wooden cabinet you'd build that instead. You wouldn't give them code and expect it to hold their belongings. Code has never entered the picture until you have something that is well-specified.

What is that supposed to mean? Yes, LLMs are often considered to be non-deterministic because, in practice, they rely on systems with unstable floating point rounding. Likewise, compilers are often considered non-deterministic because, in practice, they often rely on systems with unstable thread execution order. Of course, those are both just implementation details. You can, albeit at the cost of things like performance, remove the hidden inputs. Computers are fundamentally deterministic! Anything that runs on computers must also be deterministic.

If you were to run a compiler or LLM on a Turing machine, they would both be 100% perfectly deterministic. We only see them as being non-deterministic because, in the real world, we run them on hardware that plays tricks with computation by introducing inputs via hidden side channels. But, again, those are implementation details. Compilers and LLMs are not defined by any particular implementation.

- A product manager (PM) guides a product from its initial idea to its final launch and beyond. They define the product vision, set the strategic roadmap, and work with engineering, design, marketing, and sales teams to build features that meet customer needs and support business goals.

- A service manager oversees a company's service department, leading staff, handling complex client complaints, and ensuring efficient daily operations. They act as the main link between customers and the business, tracking performance goals and managing budgets to keep service standards high.

But, unfortunately, we can't use those definitions because both of them are about managing people. "They [...] work with engineering, design, marketing, and sales teams to", "leading staff". Exactly what you are trying to say this type of management isn't.