AnimalMuppet

I see it too.

But it comes and goes. Last week (maybe the week before), it was 15. Then, later, it was 30 with the normal "More" link.

I don't either.

But what do you believe about agent harnesses? About AIs that have tools that they can call that can do tasks that the AI, by itself, is not good at? Is that enough of "not LLM alone"? I don't know.

They're standing, but he's weakened them. He's also laid down a pattern of how to attack them.

Either the institutional protections are strengthened after 2028 (presuming the Democrats win the presidency) and before 2030 (presuming the Democrats lose a bunch of seats in Congress in the midterms), or the next try (whenever it comes) is likely to break the institutional protections and result in authoritarian rule over the US.

My dad worked for Univac, in Salt Lake City. For several years, they would hold an open house once a year, and I went to several of them as a kid. This is a real blast from the past for me.

But I didn't realize that ferrite cores were that small. The way they threated them is amazing. I thought it was much more manual than that.

Reel-to-reel tapes! Punch cards! Drum memory! Fortran! Flowcharts! I never used them professionally, but I remember seeing them.

Uniscopes! I did use those professionally, briefly.

What a time trip.

So who issued his paychecks?

Meta? That is, Facebook? Originally conceived by the security state? Zuckerberg, when he had the idea in college, didn't actually have the idea, but was given it by the security state?

I don't believe you.

Some of the others, I will give you.

Then, not completely relevant. The US government was not *hiding secret court rulings about how it spies on Americans" since the day the FBI was founded.

Spying on Americans? You could say that, perhaps, but you would have to say it about every law enforcement organization (including the local police) since 1776.

What the actual article is talking about is a massive extension, not covered by the regular "get a warrant in court" mechanism. Saying "just like the FBI" ignores how different this is, and how alien to the Constitution.

Could you be a bit more specific about the relevance of that date?

Nothing to hide? Then publish the Epstein files. All of them.

Airplanes are a crummy experience. Small seats, no legroom, no real food. It wasn't always like this.

I have a book from 1953. Among other things, it has airline timetables. You could fly from LA to Hong Kong (with several stops). It cost $1200. In 1953.

Now it's going to be a much worse experience. But it's something that regular people can afford at least once, if they want to.

Does "really great experience that I can't afford" really beat "crummy experience but at least I can afford it"?

Computers are more affordable than they were in the past (or they were, until this year). Software is more affordable than it was in the past - much of it is free. Does "I can do what I want to, but it's a really crummy experience" beat "the software is wonderful, but I can't afford all the pieces I want/need"?

This triggered a bad memory.

I was working for a large company (name withheld to protect the guilty). Back in that day, everyone had a landline phone in their cube. One day mine wasn't working. But there was a team dedicated to fixing phone problems. All I had to do was submit a service request to them.

That's great, except that the only way to submit a service request was by phone. This was about 2007, so email was definitely a thing. But no, it had to be by phone, and my phone didn't work.

I wound up having to use the phone in someone else's cube to submit the fix request for the phone in my cube.

Can you do that? Can you use someone else's account to submit the request for your account? (Without getting their account locked or suspended?)

Mine? I retired in February. I'm 64. (This isn't advice for how to handle the changes. This is saying I didn't have to personally figure it out.)

If they actually had a need for those software engineers right now, they wouldn't play that game. (Or rather, if they could make more money by having them create something than they could save on wages from playing the game.)

But at that point, they almost should be laying off engineers, even without playing any such game.

Could you be more specific?

Back then, how many people had a university education? How many even finished high school?

It was not obvious then that "mind power" was something that everyone could use - or even that a large fraction of the population could use.

Feudalism. Or worse.

I found it by looking at the "comments" page to see if there's something interesting. It doesn't care if it's off the front page.

"People who are riled up" is exactly what this is supposed to detect. It's a flamewar detector. HN doesn't want to promote such a thing on the front page, because it's not an interesting discussion.

Interesting take. I suppose it could be done, though I don't know if anyone has tried to use it that way. Let's say that an article has 50 upvotes and 20 comments. Posting 31 comments, without tripping any spam/bot detectors HN has, is going to be tedious, and may take several people. But with enough determination and people, it could probably be done - if the idea occurred to anyone else.

By the way, I think it's more than "interesting theory". I've seen dang comment more than once to the effect that comments > upvotes = off the front page.

Technically true, but I think it's misleading. It's replacing money that recipients would have to spend either on insurance or on bills from providers, or both. Well, money is fungible, and the net effect is that it goes to recipients (or at least much of it does).

Don't vaguepost. What do you claim the cause is?

21 man-years for redacting? For redacting one person's records? Still beyond absurd.

Yeah, that's begging for a lawsuit compelling them to produce the requested records.

44,000 hours? For one individual? What are they doing, transcribing with quill pens, and they first have to capture and pluck a bunch of geese in order to get the quills? Even that shouldn't take anything like that long. I can't see any way that such a number is justifiable; they should certainly be force to justify it.

"Ninja editing" is when you post something here, then come back (within the two hour edit window) and change what it says, without marking it "[Edit: <changes here>]" or something similar.

Who cares? Well, if someone is trying to reply to you, you can make their reply look like a lie or off topic (whether deliberately or not).

This gives you a problem if you decide that you overstated your case, or that you were too harsh. Do you edit in a way that removes what you said that was too harsh or too strong, or do you leave it, thereby leaving what is going to trigger hostile responses? The best way to do it might be to remove it, and add "[Edit: Removed inflammatory language.]" or something similar.

I looked at some more of their comments, and... yikes. That rebuke was more warranted than I thought.

You know, you could have given some pointers, instead of just a dismissive put-down.

But if you go too far the other direction, too many common n-grams, then it becomes platitude-speak, and nobody wants to read that either.

But, if I understand this correctly, if we make it speak "human", then we lose the accuracy of the results, and we're back in hallucination land.

I mean, maybe that's all right for when it's producing code - code is not beautifully flowing prose in the first place.

No. No. NO. That is not how any of this works.

First: Trump lost in 2020. He lost. He didn't have it taken from him, he lost. I don't know if he's too much of a narcissist to admit that, or too surrounded by yes men to actually hear the truth, but he lost.

But second, even (in an alternate universe) if he had been cheated in 2020, what he gets to make up for it is the right to run in 2024. That's it. There is no actual logic (legal or otherwise) where he gets a third term on top of this one.

No. Just no. In fact, not only no, but "no" with some other words that I shouldn't say in front of the impressionable youngsters here on HN.

If he tries, and the courts don't stop him, it's going to be a civil war. (Or it won't, which arguably might be worse.)

True. That mechanism is there.

And yet, whoever invented the wheel and axle, I'm pretty sure they didn't do so based on the bacterium's flagellum.

So, yes, the concept existed in nature. But it wasn't the inspiration for the human invention in any way.

Musk dared to talk about a massive incentive difference between the elites and the people? He dared to talk about elites growing rich off of hundreds of billions?

Am I the only one who feels like throwing up?