thot_experiment

I'm vulnerable with plenty of people, just not employers (in general). The incentive structures, especially at a company that's more than a few people are such that it is in their best interest to get as much from you for as little as possible, that's the entire point of the system.

A mutually beneficial agreement can still be adversarial? If you're getting shaken down by the mafia it's beneficial for you to pay them protection money.

It always surprises me when people don't understand that the employee-employer relationship is an adversarial one. Unless you're in a democratic co-op or similar your employer is the enemy and you should never forget that. The correct move is to try to screw them in every legal way at every turn because that is what they are doing to you. Never divulge any information that increases your attack surface, always try to extract the most money for the least effort. This is capitalism 101.

You must not allow them to fool you into thinking that these aren't the rules they're playing by. David Sirlin's "Playing to Win" is a good treatise on how to be good, and perhaps the most important lesson is to play the game by the rules as written, and not by some other set of rules that exists only in your head.

(Though in this case the victim was senior enough that I suspect he was playing the game to the best of his ability, trying to humanize himself to gain the upper hand in some other manipulation game and misplayed, kicking things into the legal arena, as one does)

I don't know that you can be absolutist about these things, we cede a lot of power to the government because it actually does make more sense to pay for and manage some things collectively. I'm deeply against surveillance like this but I don't think practically speaking we can get rid of it entirely. I think we should do our best to dismantle it as much as we can but enforcing the great responsibility part of great power on what's left is also a useful strategy.

Systems like flock cannot by their nature be good for the average person unless maybe they are democratically controlled with strict oversight and transparency. Tools to concentrate power are, and will always be used to oppress. Flock is not popular anywhere and that it's being implemented upon us rather than by us should have all of us smashing flock cameras whenever we see them. 1312

Not in the current context no, opportunity costs exist.

A. That's not a useful thing I care about nor should you (in the context of the current state of things) and B. I don't oppose AI as a concept. I oppose it as an emblem of the failure of our systems of governance to serve the common man. I oppose the implementation that people colloquially mean when they say AI, I have nothing against tensor blobs and I more or less wish intellectual property was abolished.

All my homies hate AI.

It has really given us a perfect emblem of the worst capitalism has to offer, I'm not holding my breath but perhaps this backlash will precipitate further change to drive us toward a flatter economy and a society that does a better job of rejecting exploitation and concentration of power. One that more effectively serves humanity and allows us to find a much better global optimum.

Came here to post an anti-ollama rant, real glad this is already the top comment. Nature is healing.

It's not my favorite but we do have to be aggressive in fighting these gross attempts for vc-backed silicon valley non-contributors to exploit open source labor.

I very much don't trust that article as a baseline. YMMV but I measured with a 240hz camera with a mid-high tier computer and a 144hz monitor in 2018 and a nice computer w/ 165hz in 2025 and I never got the huge latencies he experienced, I had click to photon of something like 10 frames max, so 42ms, with the average IIRC being closer to 5 frames.

It cannot. C is a wonderful language that makes me smile every time I pick it up. A truly universal tool that lets you go wherever your heart desires. Go is a prison designed to enforce a bleak uniformity on all of it's users. For only by painting everything a uniform gray can we ensure we are all equal.

I'm using Gemma 31b to build tools for myself to optimize my WoW TBC play to an absurdist level. I'm hoping to have world top 10 parses across the board in a few months, loot gods willing.

There are extreme diminishing returns in real world performance as models get bigger. 10x bigger might mean 5-10% better on benchmarks, a margin that can easily mean it's functionally equivalent in real world use or even a worse performer depending on the context it's being used in, and how good you are at providing meaningful context.

Of course the bigger model embeds more knowledge, but when neither model has the knowledge necessary to perform the task, hy3 makes idiotic decisions all the time whereas gemma 31b has a decent hit rate.

hy3 feels like someone who's read a lot of books and says the right words but has nothing of substance between their ears, gemma feels like a reasonably intelligent person who doesn't understand the domain, the latter is muuuch easier to work with than the former.

I imagine it's cheaper not to support Israeli aggression or to fuck with Iran over oil. Lessons we should have learned in 1973 and 1953.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills with hy3, it's either benchmaxxed to hell and back or skill issue on my part but I'd rather use dense gemma. I don't think there's a single model that's wasted more of my time in recent memory.

Half way to utopia.

It's $29, this is a fun gimmick to take pictures of your friends doing bullshit this summer. It's obviously far worse than your phone, the point is that it's fun.

All the people with zero sum jobs that serve to shuffle money to those with leverage.

Surely this time we'll learn our lesson and disempower the parasites that create these situations, right? Right guys?

Managers believe in the fungibility of engineers and do not understand the concept of institutional knowledge. Always has been.

Not true, aggressive post training makes models notably dumber.

Billionaires are providing much less value than we would have if random kids who lost the birth lottery were empowered to reach their potential to help society. We should not allow them to exist.

They are also noisy, polluting, and first and foremost we should endeavor to respect the will of the people in a democracy. Of course on some level it is a proxy against AI, but more importantly it's a proxy against the stratification of society. The problem is the gap between rich and poor.

This website is hosted on a single server. I was being hyperbolic sure, but we don't need the number of data centers we have by a huge margin, the primary reason they exist is because building software that runs on people's computers is not compatible with greedmaxxing.

No actual human fucking wants data centers. Every day I wake up and it feels we're moving closer to torches, pitchforks and guillotines.

This is also a good thing fwiw.

I use Office 97 for this reason, it's like 400mb installed and everything happens instantly. Grab a copy off archive.org!

That's so neat that if you type your hacker news password it automatically comes out as stars! ******* More places should have this feature.

Today on open source vampires: xaomi forks an open source project, doesn't contribute upstream, attaches usage restrictions that are probably incompatible with the license, and wants good PR. Fuck these people.

Yeah, care to elaborate? I'm not seeing the joke.