fzeroracer

Which ones? The Sacklers are a prime example of how impossible it is to actually go bankrupt; considering they harmed millions of people, had the government step in and still remain one of the wealthiest families in the US.

> I am more annoyed by the anti-AI luddites filling the comments with low value complaints than I am by quality content written partially by an LLM.

Low value content is still content, written by a human being with a specific point. I would argue that LLM written content is even worse than that, because what value does it add when you or I can just ask the LLM itself for it? Its existence is solely that of regurgitation.

The combination of the internet and how insanely pushed every single facet of AI bullshit is has made me incredibly cynical. I see a post like this reach the top of HN by a nobody, getting top votes and all I can think is that this is once again, another campaign to try and make people feel better about AI.

Every time I've asked people about what the hell they're actually doing with AI, they vanish into the ether. No one posts proof, they never post a link to a repo, they don't mention what they're doing at their job. The most I ever see is that someone managed to vibe code a basic website or a CRUD app that even a below-average engineer can whip up in a day or two.

Like this entire thread is just the equivalent of karma farming on Reddit or whatever nonsense people post on Facebook nowadays.

From the article you said you've read:

> Before passing through the device, the plaintiff spoke to another officer, trying to explain the situation, but was told that the AIT machine had been “adjusted” so that it would not damage her spinal cord implant.

Where are they? The vast majority of executive and board members are kissing every inch of this administration's ass.

There are two important failures I see with this logic:

First, I am not arguing for reusability. Reusability is one of the most common mistakes you can make as a software engineer because you are over-generalizing what you need before you need it. Code should be written for your specific use case, and only generalized as problems appear. But if you can recognize that your specific use case fits a known problem, then you can find the best way to solve that problem, faster.

Second, when you're using an LLM to make your code more 'reusable' you are taking full responsibility for everything that LLM vomits out. You're no longer assembling a car from well known parts, taking care to tailor it to your use case as needed. You're now building everything in said car, from the tires to the engine and the rearview mirror.

Coding is a constant balance between understanding what you're solving for and what can solve it. Using LLMs takes the worst of both worlds, by offloading both your understanding of the problem and your understanding of the solution.

> Yeah, exactly. And LLM help developers save time from writing the same thing that has be done by other developers for a thousand times. I don't know how one can spins this as a bad thing

Do you ever ask why you're writing the same thing over and over again? That's literally the foundational piece of being an engineer; understanding when you're reinventing the wheel when there's a perfectly good wheel nearby.

No, that's not how copyright laws work. Especially in a world where the starting point is the accused making something and marketing it as someone else's IP with a license change.

I'm sure DOGE and all of its fans have a lot to say about this. After all, we all know fighting waste and corruption in the government is exactly why it was formed.

It's up to them to prove that a) the original implementation was not part of whatever data set said AI used and b) that the engineers in question did not use the original as a basis.

> The lost because of that? If so, it sounds like it was the red-state liberals being immature and choosing a no-win situation: either lose because you run a candidate that makes liberals happy but can't win the state or liberals doom a candidate who can win the state because he only offered the liberals 90% instead of 100%.

This is an incredibly nonsensical rationale. For some people, including myself, abortion is going to be a hard line. I don't care if you think compromise is a better option, if that line is crossed they are losing my vote. If abortion can be a single-issue policy for Republicans then I can damn well make it into one for myself.

> Such black and white thinking. You'd rather have 0% alignment on issues than 90% or 75%? Because that's what you get when a Republican wins.

Correct. I'm done voting for the lesser evil. If it works for Republicans it can work for the left. As much as you say it's a 'dumb strategy' we're in this situation today because it works. It's what got the current set of Republicans into power.

> Tell me: how many competitive races have "Tea Party republicans" lost because they ran a nut?

Most Republican elected officials in Texas? Ken Paxton is insane, incredibly corrupt and someone that should've been ran out of the state years ago. Same with Greg Abott. The idea that democrats should compromise a bit with insane assholes who are causing direct harm to women is a mistake. Even if you consider it 'tactically' correct, morally it is a mistake and is a losing proposition for their own voters.

> They didn't moderate enough, where they needed to moderate. I know for a fact Democrats have lost Senate races in "red" states, at least in part, because the candidate couldn't take a clear pro-life position.

I know for a fact that Democrats have lost senate races in red states because the candidate took a clear pro-life position. Your arguments are not going to work on me, considering I've lived in Texas and have seen what happens when Democrats compromise their position into oblivion. Or hell, you can look at the DINOs and see how every goddamn time they torpedo'd policy over the past decade.

Any Democrat that chooses to compromise over issues like abortion or trans rights or anything like that should be chased out of the running. We should adopt the exact same strategy that Tea Party republicans used to gain control over the Republican party.

'Compromise' is strictly just code for becoming Republican, and I'm not going to vote for a Republican.

A great example of this is abortion, where for years Democrats did have 'moderate' positions on abortion. The end result has been taking away people's rights and stomping on any notion of any abortion.

Compromise is how we got to here in the first place, with feckless politicians unable to have any sort of spine and gradually shrinking the amount of constituents they'll fight for.

It's happening on both sides now because the Supreme Court has signed off on it for years and given all the power to gerrymandering efforts from the right. The public can't reject what is unaccountable to said public.

What percentage of those eligible voters do you think would've mattered? For example I lived in WA and voted, how much do you think my vote mattered over an entire red county of 100 people voting for Trump?

Our electoral system is designed to disenfranchise the most populated areas.

I wouldn't say it's a reflection of the electorate. There's a lot of states that have been gerrymandered for years and Christians in extremely red areas have outsized voting power compared to everywhere else. Combined with the complete media capture by billionaires, the dumbest rule by fiat.

Unfortunately Christian nationalists happen to be extremely wealthy and extremely stupid.

This is all stuff they've already done in the past few months alone. I think it's time for people to take their heads out of the sand and look what's been happening around them.

If the Trump admin so chooses, they could absolutely obliterate Anthropic in an instant. They don't really care about tricky things like 'legality' or 'the court of law', they could just force everyone to stop interacting with them, raid their offices and steal all their shit.

Perhaps they should've found their spine a year earlier; right now their only hope is that the admin isn't stupid enough to crash the propped-up economy over petty bullshit. But knowing how they behave, well.

It's rather amusing that this is the proverbial 'red line', not y'know, everything else this administration has been tearing up and running roughshod over. Maybe this would've been less of an issue if companies were more proactive about this bullshit in the first place?

That's why it's hard for me to feel bad about companies suddenly finding themselves on the receiving end. They dug their grave inch by inch and are suddenly surprised when they get shoved into it.

Rich assholes are all consolidating their media empires together so that they can control everything. It's all so tiresome every time some rich dipshit runs off to whine to the president so that they can get a more favorable deal on their billion dollar acquisition.

Netflix is happy to walk away with this since they get the money and will just buy it up in a fire sale when Larry Ellison is done gutting everything for his own personal satisfaction.

Why do you and many of your industry friends conveniently never actually post their 'perfect code' when asked for proof? I've asked like five different people now that make these claims and they just vanish into the ether.

Considering how many companies that have adopted AI led to disastrous bugs and larger security holes?

I wouldn't call it an idealist position as much as a fools one. Companies don't give a shit about software security or sustainable software as long as they can ship faster and pump stocks higher.

I would say the rubicon was crossed a little over a month ago when the government started using a paramilitary group to kill American citizens but people's definition of 'rubicon' is going to vary wildly depending on how much of the boot they're deep throating. And unfortunately, the majority of the tech industry has it pretty deep.

This is what I think a lot of the people who advocate for 'AI generated images being art' don't get. There's no effort or intentionality into what's being created; it has the look and appearance of 'polished art' (that breaks down when you look closer) but behind it is nothing.

It's also why AI generated code is a nightmare to read and deal with, because the intention behind the code does not exist. Code outputting malformed input because it was a requirement two years ago, a developer throwing in a quick hack to fix a problem, these are things you can divine and figure out from everything else.

> “If you’re not doing anything illegal, why worry about it?” said long-time Jacumba resident Allen Stanks, 70.

Glad to see they dug out the most intelligent person to react to this information. It's also incredibly funny because the opposite should also apply to the government; if they're not doing anything illegal then they should have no need to hide their local surveillance network inside of abandoned trailers or other items. Just another reason to toss on the pile for dismantling CBP.

Can you explain what happened to Larry Bushart?

People have posted their blogs here before and gotten the HN hug of death plus a few hundred comments. It's 2026 and not 2016; HN is a much larger platform than people seem to think it is and HN has significant eyes to be shifted if your posts reach the front page. And given how cheap it is to throw bots at whatever site has open registration it doesn't surprise me to see manipulation here.

Great, you have access to a hallucinating chat bot. The rest of us are losing access to basic computing and entertainment thanks to skyrocketing prices so that these companies can create more refined bots for you to chat with.

This has nothing to do with the actual problem, which is Flock itself.

The fact that Flock controls all of the cameras, all of the data and said data is easily accessible means police and the state have access to information that they should only get with a warrant. A business having a camera storing video data that's completely local isn't an issue. A business having a camera which is connected to every other business that has a camera is.

A lot of people just don't understand how thoroughly rotted our policing institutions are in the US. In any other scenario if someone pulled something similar they'd be blacklisted from their career for life. But the cop in question got rehired elsewhere after being fired. Corrupt cops never leave the system, they just get shuffled around.