TaLiTr

Nobody should have those rights. Copyright has been a disaster for the human race.

I'm copying your comment for my wall of false equivalences.

> Don’t go there. Plenty of other restaurants to choose from. They just lost a customer due to their hostility.

This is a wild take to me. Around here pretty much nobody posts their menu online on any website, the technical literacy is just quite poor. If you limited yourself to places that did, you'd only get big fast-food chains.

> I really wish client side end to end encryption would become more widespread in the developer community.

I think asking every self-hosted app to implement their own encryption is a massive waste of resources. If you need the data encrypted, it should be handled by a dedicated app like Cryptomater or at the OS level.

> Eh, if your take of this had any bearing to reality than I don't think most of the books written by Isaac Asimov would have gotten very far, but instead they've defined robot science fiction for decades.

I'm talking about how the law actually works, and you say it's not based in reality and cite fiction books in the same paragraph?

I was talking about how the real robotic systems that actually exist in reality, to be clear.

> Soon a robot can commit a murder but nothing will be done because of your line of reasoning.

That's rather hyperbolic.

Are you seriously suggesting in that situation the robot should be accused of murder? The robot's operator could be accused of murder, but it could just be negligence without intent. Because that does, and should matter to the law.

As of right now, on Firefox for Android, I am prompted to log in.

> Then the AI companies can simply download a copy of Anna's Archive.

And so can everyone else. That's the ideal outcome.

Only Anti-AI types are against this, they probably don't even care about the books, it's just a proxy for trying to stop the "evil AI companies."

Unlike archive.org which is a real business, Anna's Archive is basically piracy. You could try to sue them but you'd have to find them first. This IMO makes them more resilient against that sort of thing, and also means they can actually do their job.

Massively missing the point. Having paper books isn't the point. Preserving copies of books is the point, so history isn't lost. Often those books only exist as paper copies due to their age. I don't really care what happens to the paper copies, only that their content is preserved in a way that is accessible. Anthropic's private servers aren't it.

At work we bought a used tablet off eBay to replace a customer device where they really wanted an identical (obsolete) model. OMG the amount of extra crap that Verizon branded tablet had pre-installed was agonizing. All system apps so you couldn't get rid of it.

> I think he’s a net positive to the world.

As a person he's either a poser or a neo-nazi. As a government agent he's responsible for many deaths and as of yet untold harm. Tesla was one of the earliest EV manufacturers, but these days they're overpriced and will be remembered for panel gaps and being destroyed by a car wash. SpaceX has done a lot for that sector, but will mostly be remembered as the company that fucked astrophotography with 10s of thousands of satellites. And Twitter has been dragged into irrelevance so badly it was being called a "reverse startup." Neuralink seems to be going nowhere...

Where's the benefit?

What a strange and pretentious comment.

They're not mutually exclusive, two things can be had at the same time.

To "engage with your point":

> hire a ghost writer. Writers are affordable and plentiful.

> use your position as a presumably well remunerated tech person to hire a writer to cater to it.

Ah yes "fuck you, pay me." You aren't entitled to his or anyone else's money.

So many comments in this thread feel like some kind of writer's union demanding that everyone only write in the approved fashion or hire someone from the union.

> If you're looking for the pleasure of writing, you will unfortunately have to undergo, as all writers have through history, the process of suffering and discovery that we call writing.

He writes, he gets pleasure from it. Who are you to tell him he's doing it wrong?

> surely stuffing a low-mid-tier game full of microtransactions works much better than selling a really good game.

Do they? That doesn't seem like a guarantee. Battlefront 2 was the most high profile game in recent memory I can think of. An otherwise fun game that bombed so hard because of microtransactions EA had to remove all of them and basically gave up on developing it.

> the engine limits the kinds of games that are thinkable.

Does anyone actually do that? Most people just sit around thinking things up, and only later are they sobered to the fact of how much work it would be to implement a niche feature that isn't a substantial part of the game.

> Which is why so many games look and play exactly the same.

I'd argue that 90% of that is caused by default shaders. It's why people complain about "unreal engine sheen" it's how most of the materials get set up for you if you don't care to change it. The other 9% is default character controllers for the same reasons. 1% or less is going to be caused by some unalienable quirk of the engine that can never change.

> Steam success is somewhat correlated with making your own engine. Novelty and standing out from the crowd are the things that sell your game.

Successful games often have novelty and stand out. But there's an aspect of survivor bias. Probably plenty of games that are novel or stand out in all the wrong ways. It's also not clear that making your own engine causes novelty or you to stand out.

> It's a lot harder to do new things if what you can think is limited by your infrastructure.

Again, not convinced that's the way people go. Maybe they try to implement it and it's clunky, or doesn't scale, or trashes performance. So they scale it back, rework it, or write some custom code. An engine isn't magic, any amount of code you have to write to implement a feature is less than a whole new engine. Would Balatro have been a better game if it had a completely bespoke rendering pipeline? I'd say probably not.

I think GP is talking about using an LLM to write filters for the constantly changing Facebook ad serving code, which would be distributed to users.

> I don’t believe any warrant is required for police to follow someone, so they wouldn’t even need the tracker!

Interesting how you reframe that, because the police would absolutely need a warrant to put a GPS tracker in your car.

This kinda proves everyone's point about this sort of thing, an officer following you is clearly different from the omnipresent surveillance dragnet enabled by Flock cameras.

In Canada, video footage that personally identifies me is considered personal information. This includes the license plate number.

Yes, it is. If you were investigating a business or building, you would document vehicles coming and going.

Is it OK to install a GPS tracker on your car if you only drive on public roads? You seem to think that would not compromise your privacy in any way.

Solar has a problem so it's a vanity project, but coal has a billion problems but it doesn't matter because you can adjust the output?

Like it genuinely sounds like you're suggesting our current terrible system shouldn't even be attempted to be improved unless there's a magic perfect solution to replace it.

Ah yes, all of anime is a "fetish thing."

People like you are the reason every single communication, logo, and document is overly formal corpo-slop that reads like a LinkedIn post.

> so it is profitable to sell vibecoding tools, but its unlikely to be consumed by "serious organizations"

Isn't Anthropic currently using a "vibe coded" version of Bun they made using their own models?

> that the link/post author wasted time and could have just had an LLM do it instead. And I think it’s important that we make clear that that style of comment is not welcome here.

So if someone talks about how "X" was hard and the first comment mentions there's a library to do "X", is that rude? Or is there a carve-out for the scary AI?

If someone came in with a story about how they were able to easily create an N64 game with No-code/AI/Libraries and the first comment was "ha! I did the same thing in a cave with a box of scraps" that would also be rude.

God forbid people share anecdotes about projects they were working on. On HN...

> "I just made this with AI instead, it was so easy and I didn't even have to do anything myself" is effectively also dunking on the author and disrespecting/devaluing the effort they put into whatever they submitted

Yeah! How dare someone share an anecdote about a similar experience they had! On HN of all places. Somebody sharing an experience isn't disrespectful, neither is talking about how they had an easier time doing so.

> Personally, if I read such a comment under something I created, I'd feel way more insulted than if they just called me a slur or something.

Yes, you anti's are certainly irrationally offended by AI.

> ... every single post not directly related to AI has someone in the comments mentioning ... how they used it in relation to the topic of the post somehow

Have you considered that maybe, just maybe, many people use AI?

> I'm starting to believe it's straight up astroturfing.

"Anyone who disagrees must be a shill" is certainly a take.

> I'd argue that such comments deserve to be dunked on, downvoted, or even flagged

So everyone that disagrees with your post should flag it right? Since flagging is just a value judgment on something you don't like?

> unless you want all non-AI discussion on HN to die off.

Least hyperbolic Anti-AI comment.

>Quantamagazine is owned by the heavily AI invested Renaissance Fund.

Except it's not? It's owned by a private foundation where the only link is both were founded by the same dude who hasn't run either in like 15 years.

That seems like a pretty big thing to just gloss over like it's just set-dressing.

I don't trust anything the North Korean government says without external verification, why would I believe the U.S. government?

My comment was referring to the fact that art is in the eye of the beholder. Given your biases, nobody could show you an AI image that you would say is art.

I think you're misunderstanding me, I'm agreeing with the GP that AI generated food pics are a net-negative.

The sentence is more "I don't get who would think that(AI generated food pics) is a good idea" but I could see how it was ambiguous given the quote.