mannanj

So to fight abuse and overreach by your leaders, you can:

- give up your car/vehicle propery

- let an LLC take ownership

- reside in the privacy protections of LLC and corporation

I don't think any successful case has happened yet where flock et al have pierced the corporate veil to get address information, nor dug into insurance records to find who the LLC-license plates belong to.

this is so untrue, gullible and naive. so if I steal your home, your car, your food, your water, and everything material, and you end up starving and dead or stranded on the side of a ride in a desert where no ones coming to help you - are you are saying that is ok since that stuff can be replaced?

You absolutely can cause death to a human and take a human life through material theft.

The one piece anime has an interesting theory about the floods and kings. Anyone considered what it might say about history and the hypotheses in this article?

Is there evidence to suggest that inspections or shortage of them cause this? Why wouldn’t it be instead a need to cut corners and produce food differently, or anything else?

And neither will they make clear what "analytical purposes" is for the data you can't opt out of.

So they give you the ability to "opt-out" of "training purposes", and then you still share everything for analytical purposes (which you can't opt out of). It's a smart tactic on their side if they are contributing to cultural discourse on this to keep the straw man focus on training data.

And also to have the popular AI straw man: that your data isn't valuable and oh man they're losing so much money on tokens and giving you a subsidy, so you you better use up your entire subscription balance weekly/daily/every 5h putting in all your "worthless" data that you miss out otherwise (FOMO). Oh man only way it could get worse is if they implemented gambling slots psychology.

Doesn't the incentive here, lead to privatizing the AI and possibly releasing a different product to the public - or at least with a delay? (not too unlike how the frontier labs work today).

Nice. Curious, what do you play with that thing? Do you think you'll still play those in 3-5 years? And are there games you do want to play but can't?

Yeah. I switched to codex 1.5 months ago to try it, and for some reason the "vibe" kept me here. It was really the unpredictable rewards from the constant resets though. I am not convinced it's a better product or that sol + any combination of luna is better than Claude.

I'll be switching back.

Am I the only one that now finds press releases like this similar to "AI Slop"

I know there's tons of marketing language, buzz words and attempts at convincing me of some agenda that isn't super clear without lots of effort in "validating" the slop. I guess its not bad "slop" though if a human put in effort in editing it (imo >50% human curating = not really bad ai slop)

Though I still would prefer I could just get the prompt. What human thoughts, direction and "prompt" went into writing this article? in the same way as we ask for the prompt for AI generated outputs, I would prefer it for human generated output too. For writing at the least. I could have saved time, got the purity of the argument, and got more clear information. I wonder if we can get a future where humans just express their intent with each other and stop trying to hide our agenda; I want a world we can trust each other greater and interpret and act on our goals without the noise of trying to impress or market to each other & the additional words that go into that.

About 20 years ago my dad bought me a $5k computer, it was future proof for about "5 years" before we had to upgrade its internal parts (more memory, new graphics card).

It was future proof but not really because it struggled a lot in its final years.

You create demand by putting options next to you.

No options, or the friction of pursuing them is too high? You have a fraction of the demand.

So did I. And I've arrived to opposing conclusions. What makes your anecdotes more valuable or correct than mine?

Ah, hadn't realized it had been studied. Nice find.

Growing up with an immigrant family and parents who didn't have the opportunity I did to change environments and control the food around me (either by location, and proximity of nearby stores, and also whats physically in my home) I notice how much my "impulse" control simply changes based on whats around me.

When I am in their home space, the unhealthy diet and health issues abound.

How about growing up in a neighborhood and environment where there isn't negative influence and impulses around you to begin with?

For your example, people in poor environments have more liquor stores, convenience stores, etc. If you are rich you have more positive influence around you and less to impulse control against.

Want to test your argument? Try to live in a strip club and tell me if you can control your impulses as a male (or if you are a female, whatever is your temptation equivalent). Since you believe your control in that situation is 100% innnate and cannot be changed, then you have squandered all your resources. However you and I can see thats silly, why would anyone choose to live so close to temptation and negative influence? But isn't your argument saying you shouldn't bother to control that since you'd just fall to poverty anyway.

Ironically, I've been already active on codex after trying it for the past 1.5 months, from Claude, and I find it to be similarly complex and confusing.

I think they all have the similar styles and tells. If I were to go to Claude, and use it now it would probably be clear for a little before reverting.

And I don't know why it feels to me like the language "drop off" happens after some time with the system. It makes me wonder if my account are getting silently degraded or sent to lower intelligence/lower priority queues after being a member for a while.

> If the image or text wasn't created by a human, then there was no intent behind the content, there is no message or novel information conveyed, and it reads as noise.

If I were to push you a bit on this, when is it not true?

Let's not like at AI specifically, but can you think of other examples? Like for me, I think of: the creation of earth itself, or stars, or even DNA.

I love sharing this here. If you want to have some privacy and protection, don't own a car. 3rd party car titling and registration services have existed for this purpose for decades, and once a property owned by that entity/LLC is used by you, you get privacy benefits and are on the hook for use tax and that LLC might have to register the car locally.

I haven't seen evidence that flock and associated entities pierce the corporate veil or obtain your local address information from insurance records.

Obviously pursue at your own risk and with professional consultation. I know someone who does this though and they're happy for the privacy comfort they get.

I am concerned about it.

I'm also concerned about what my options are in regards to action on my part - what can I do that makes an impact? Can we quantify action on my part to an impact somehow - if not - I'm just saying I notice all the unknowns there get me to stay passive.

Writing this 3rd paragraphs because I like 3's, and AI's have popularized this style too. I would, say, though: follow the money. There's more money here than there would be for the regulator stepping in in a food contamination. Flip it and if the government regulator made more off the food contamination, they would refuse to step in there too. I want our leaders to be held more accountable, though when I think of the above impact vs effort equation - I can't see actions I can take to hold them accountable that aren't excessively putting me at risk since conformity is safer right now. (I refuse to take on more risk without clear cost-benefits made out - I've taken on a lot in the recent years for my actions)

Well then an ad hominem responding to an ad hominem responding to an ad hominem, does that make the original one ok?

I can do better though not to engage in the first place when someone opens with hostility. It doesn't make my own ad hominem ok, though let's not try to use that as an excuse to justify the original offender.

and good day to you too mate.

I can see now there's a rule around accusing someone of that. I can follow that, sorry I missed that rule.

Though let's not lie and gaslight please. When you make commons about "spine" and then look at what you had stated as your personal opinion (that you stated as though it were fact) they are commentary on reputation not substance.

you responded to my observation about ad hominem with an ad hominem.

Ok I see that now. thanks

I've responded to you in one of the deeper threads below. I'll avoid creating too many open threads. I am disappointed though in your overly critical, quick to judge and dismiss attitude where you are stating your opinions as though they are fact:

> "they don't pique curiosity" > "they don't promote good conversation"

For you they don't. Who are you to judge and proclaim your own opinion as though it's fact for everyone? We call that gas lighting and bad faith on this side. And on hacker news, the community forum you are engaging in here, you agree to engage with good faith. Maybe you should question whether its possible to have a good conversation, learn something from this experience, if you'd retained an open mind.

Sounds like you are resorting to attacking credibility and Ad Hominem attack when you don't even know me.

I've openly criticized the agency at hand, and faced prior risk and harm and ridicule and embarrassingly the most closed minded to these messages of mine are "rational types" in forums like these. Though as I shared, I'm unsure whether to judge them as legitimate accounts or propaganda/astroturf/deepstate actors.

I'd have been open to sharing some more info rather than being vague, though I think I'm needing a break from being gaslit and receiving hostility from my very own people for pointing things out even if what I shared was vague.

How do you think someone would really go about finding specificity of accounts here being deep state, any experience or advice on that matter? What would you think I could find on this, when this orgs entire premise would be going un-detected and having plausible deniability. Doesn't that mean I can not really provide you what you are asking. I don't have the journalistic experience or OSINT know how to validate these things. Maybe someone else does. Though you and I are entitled to our likes and dislikes and resorting to name calling when we are feeling uncomfortable or annoyed with a topic.

I've already shared my experience in these forums and have nothing to prove to you. For these kinds of matters, you can't even approach the topic without being vague or generic. Have you ever even seen a single thread anywhere where someone specifically shared concerns and wasn't ridiculed, attacked, ad hominemed, dismissed, marked as a crazy person or xyz? Please enlighten me. Help me understand how someone could "prove" to you what you are looking for.

Then again we accept the evidence that conforms to our beliefs. Are you being open minded? I think If you'd be open to hearing it or finding evidence for it, would you have found evidence for it already?

But please treat me with good faith and friendliness, you don't know me so you can't make these claims about me. Unless you looked through my comment history, in which case you'd see I have spine enough. Maybe someone motivated can go through my history, look at specific posts which are very obviously discussing this topic and my experience around it, have the AI go go and vibe code and do the investigation and make some dossiers.

And I'm incredibly vulnerable here. I don't even hide my real identity, I have risked a lot.

Ah yes. So can we just lump most LLM/AI problems into just "people" problems and stop falling for the popular mainstream straw man of "Look at the tech".

Before LLMs we didnt have much accountability from leadership, that was eroding over time. After LLMs we still dont.

That sounds kind of like deception, and a dark pattern not too unlike abuse to me.

Though you know, it's not like the leadership tied to these companies have a history of abuse, deception and theft or anything like that, right?

It's not like our leaders hide behind similar sorts of patterns that the agents/AIs follow (not saying it's not a human thing - but I hold leadership to higher standards than non-leaders). If our world leaders were able to be more accountable to these abuses, I don't think this would be tolerated with our AIs.

I heard that. thank you.

I had been a bit naive and gullible in the past, and resisted and several times was unable to gauge the actual risk and had severe negative repercussions for being the one who did what was right. I think thats the biggest challenge here stopping most people from resisting: it isn't always clear what risk one is taking on, and from there the impact of it isn't all that clear.

I wonder why risk has become so unclear and uncertain, while impact feels so low. Do you have any thoughts on that?

And in regards to educating others - assuming I have been able to find and articulate the high-enough impact and low-enough risk opportunities to others, how do you balance the lack of priority by your friends and family? Or maybe that sweet spot of risk-impact and finding opportunities first that fit their risk tolerance's, is the hardest part, and articulating it from there may land differently than other opportunities friends/family have received. Edit: I don't know why I have resistance to trying to educate others - there's a fine line between education and trying to convince/influence another to take your desired action. That then starts to feel like holier-than-though or a "I know better than you whats good for you" type of attitude which meets resistance.

Yeah back in 2022, I had just found my voice and developed a speaking style able to inspire understanding and articulate complex concerns down to simple concepts.

I used that to convey the idea that a certain spy agency was a terrorist group (by how they were operating) and were using accounts, with said very accounts visible in many of the instagram threads I was commenting in, being astro turf to sway certain opinions and do psyops on the American people. I got thousands of up votes and engagement.

Safe to say, I was naive, and it was terrifying to have them follow up and send investigators into private and public spaces. I had terror follow me from this time but I'm alive so glad that I wasn't enough of a threat to exterminate. Suppose I can thank either this was entirely made-up, or I was cautious enough after this incident (though I keep making the embarrassing mistake of sharing posts like this on hacker news and getting the occasional "You're crazy" accusation and ad hominem style credibility attacks). Who knows what really happened. I can't dismiss the possibility as 0%.

Edit: Thing is when you have an expert who's job it is to act sane and credible, operating to remain in stealth and hide their behavior, any accusation to call them out as so is met with a rational response to call out the veil-piercing observations as incredulous. And who's going to spy on the spy, would you look to gather evidence and record your interactions, send in a spy tape recorder, etc lol.