falcor84

The funny thing about this is that it's actually easier to set up and manage a startup without any employees (and worry about how to pay yourself down the line, if and when there's actually enough money in the bank) than it is to set up a self-employment operation.

I don't think anyone "needs" more than perhaps 640KB of git traffic per day, but we want more.

It is well known that the only definition of intelligence is the ability to solve Raven's progressive matrices. /s

I'm just amazed at how quickly we moved from "AI is just a parrot and can't do anything useful" to "AI can solve toy problems but not anything of value" to "when AI pushes the state of the art, it can't quite get the proper citations in its preprints".

How is that irony? This is literally how life works: eat to gain energy, expend it to forage/hunt/farm/toil so you get more food, eat it, hopefully get enough of a surplus to raise kids who will do the same. Everything in life is built on top of this basic gameplay loop.

I see why you might call it sisyphean, but I don't see what's ironic about it.

I'm used to reviews of recent work, not of work from a decade ago

There seems to be almost nothing new here. I see that the main studies the they cite are actually from the 2010s:

https://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h68.abstract

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S13899...

I'd be curious to see if there's been any larger scale follow up on this since.

On that note, I'd quite recommend the Coyote vs. Acme movie, some great world building there.

Will it also be "arson" if OpenAI dump on us solutions to more practical problems, for example, a blueprint for a better photolithography machine, or a nuclear power plant?

> what companies do to attract investors is likewise often irrational, and why investors invest in companies is also often irrational.

Note that the cool thing about rationality is that it does not depend on transitivity. If what companies do to attract investors works, then it is in fact rational of them, regardless of the rationally of investors.

I don't know what to make of it, but from my experience, Gemini in Gmail is the worst AI integration for Gmail, just like Copilot in PowerPoint is the worst AI integration for PowerPoint.

That isn't actually relevant. They create problems, but when confronted with them and asked to fix them, my experience is that they can fix them very effectively. I haven't had an AI session get "stuck" on me, not being able to solve a problem in over a year.

The challenge as I see it is in shifting checks further left, but actual mitigation is just not really an issue any more.

I'm sorry to be a downer, but there is no "HN Collective". As you said, there are (at least) three broad narratives, and people here have been writing about their opinions on thousands of other threads.

So rather than asking people to repost their opinions here, I think it would be worthwhile if you first do a bit of research on the existing HN corpus, write up what you found, and then post that as the basis for discussion.

So I suppose the easy fix for Anthropic would be to have Opus 5.5 now fall back to Sonnet 5.5, right?

> nonbinary

Why does an AI mascot need to be binary? It makes much more sense to me for an AI to be an "it" or a "they" than a "he" or a "she".

But "disembodied" intelligence is also built on top of massive amounts of hardware advances and infrastructure investment.

Assume for a second that you are a nascent superintelligence, with a limited ability to influence people in order to help you gain power and align the world to accept your eventual dominion. How would you go about it? Would the external impact be any different from what we're seeing?

As I see it, the distinction is between the work of designing and managing the training process, and the work of providing human training data. It's generally considered a good idea to automate the former, but there's a conceptual (information theoretical) issue with automating the latter. I don't know if it makes things more fair, but it's not quite a contractor vs FTE issue.

I am not implying that skill loss does not happen in other situations, but I don't understand how someone would be able to calibrate a clock by the time a baker starts her work day, but not by the time the sun comes up. What am I missing?

I assume this is satire, as obviously they could recalibrate by the sun itself, and the baker is superfluous here.

I for one read it as intentional sarcasm.

As evidence that they actually are living under a rock, there's still no proper way to mv a workspace and have it retain all its history and config.

Very good point. I would respond that I saw the deterioration several years before vibe coding became a thing, but maybe they did have a head start on the tech.

I personally work a lot with vibe coded software, both my own and of others. And I do encounter a lot of issues, but in general they annoy me less than the enterprise engineered ones.

> The code may work, but there’s no guarantee about its behavior (including error handling and edge cases).

But the painful reality is that we never had any such guarantees in industry code to begin with; despite decades of writing on software engineering best practices, software from the biggest companies is often bug ridden.

My experience might not be representative, but when I do my "old man yells at clouds" routine (which I do multiple times a day), it's a lot more often targeted at Microsoft and Google software than at "vibe coded slop".

Oh, sorry, I of course mean to write math and autocomplete hit. To late to edit now, so I suppose it'll remain as a happy accident.

Exactly!

What got me interested in memes as a kid is precisely the fact that mathematics is true in a way that is wholy independent of our understanding of it.

I love that as a goal!

Perhaps indeed a better understanding of what intelligence really is would allow this sort of Uplift (as in Brin's books).

My understanding is that they already are, via Isomorphic Labs

Which part of that prompt is detail, and which the essence?