skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
In the past, you had to put a lot of effort to produce a text which seemed to be high quality, especially when you knew nothing about the subject. By the look of text and the usage of the words, you could tell how professional the writer was and you had some confidence that the writer knew something about the subject. Now, that is completely removed. There is no easy filter anymore.

While the professional looking text could have been already wrong, the likelihood was smaller, since you usually needed to know something at least in order to write convincing text.
> I already questioned the information before and continue to do so.

You might question new information, but you certainly do not actually verify it. So all you can hope to do is sense-checking - if something doesn't sound plausible, you assume it isn't true.

This depends on having two things: having trustworthy sources at all, and being able to relatively easily distinguish between junk info and real thorough research. AI is a very easy way for previously-trustworthy sources to sneak in utter disinformation without necessarily changing tone much. That makes it much easier for the info to sneak past your senses than previously.
You're getting downvoted, but I agree with your last sentence — and not just about AI. The amount of negativity here regarding almost everything is appalling. Maybe it's rose-tinted nostalgia but I don't remember it being like this a few years ago.
Do you have a reference for cleaning systems being harsh? Having moved countries I noticed many difference in: water hardness (will make your cloths stiffer), materials used (when you buy stuff), usage (car versus biking vs public transport), weather (some places is more rainy), washing habits (not everybody washes as often).

Overall my impression is that the quality of the clothes affects more their lasting chances than all the other aspects.
> If you write regularly and you're not using AI, you simply cannot keep up with the competition.

Is that true today? I guess it depends what kind of writing you are talking about, but I wouldn't think most successful writers today - from novelests to tech bloggers - rely that much on AI, but I don't know. Five years from now, could be a different story.
“Funding agencies the world over are interested in maximizing their return on investment in the scientific world. Indeed, the European Research Council recently invested $1.7 million in a program to study serendipity—the role of luck in scientific discovery—and how it can be exploited to improve funding outcomes.”

What came out of this study? The article left me hanging.
Well we’re going to need some system of PKI that is tied to real identities. You can keep being anonymous if you want but I would prefer not and prefer to not interact with the anonymous, just like how I don’t want to interact with people wearing ski masks.
I have never read more bullshit in my life than during the corona pandemic, all written by humans. So you should never trust something you read, always question the source and it's reasoning.

At the same time I use copilot on a daily basis, both for coding as well as the normal chat.

It is not perfect, but I'm at a point I trust AI more than the average human. And why shouldn't I? LLMs ingest and combine more knowledge than any human can ever do. An LLM is not a human brain but it's actually performing really well.
You're welcome in my house !

Jokes aside - completely agree, pretty much the same for me.
> Capitalism started by putting up fences around land to kick people out and keep sheep in.

That's factually wrong. Capitalism is about moving wealth more efficiently: easier to allocate money/wealth to X through the banking system than to move sheep/wealth to X's farm.
That's fine he can stick with his horse and buggy. Cognition is undergoing its transition to automobiles.
I mean, to be selfish at apparently a dicey point in history, go ahead and FUD and get people to believe this.

None of my useful work is AI-able, and some of the useful work is towards being able to stand apart from what is obviously generated drivel. Sounds like the previous poster with the bootstrapped business is in a similar position.

Apparently AI is destroying my potential competition. That seems unfair, but I didn't tell 'em to make such an awful mistake. How loudly am I obliged to go 'stop, don't, come back'?
My understanding was that's meant to be a way "ordinary people" () can contribute to the project by seeding one or more torrents with a part of their archive contents, to try and achieve a sort of "distributed backup", and it's not meant as a way for final users to get that one book they need.

() that is, people that can't run a IPFS node or other advanced options due to their limited space/network/skills/money.
There was a meme along the lines of people will start including slurs in their messages to prove it wasn’t AI generated.
On an individual level - no, I don't think so, at least not easily. One can't be helped if they don't want to, or don't see a reason why they would need help. Successful therapy is 99% your own work, a therapist will help you find the door but it's you who must take the step.

On social level, we need to call out this sort of viewpoint/behaviour, and make it clear it's beyond unacceptable. Then it's up to the individual to decide if they want to reintegrate with society (which would be predicated on seeking help).
Were you lucky?
There are areas it doesn't have to be as "precise", like image generation or editing which I believe better suited for AI tools
> The most successful people are not the most talented, just the luckiest, a new computer model of wealth creation confirms. Taking that into account can maximize return on many kinds of investment.

What's the opposite of a tautology? Because this headline is it.

If wealth creation is purely luck based, as the headline implies, then maximising wealth creation is purely about getting luckier... and taking this information into account will likely do you no good whatsoever
It's the same with New teams. One of the most upvoted issues in their uservoice/techcomminity/feedback hub/whatever is the ability to set multiple spell check languages. It's only ever the language you have your Teams UI in. Even worse, the date format uses by planner, calendar etc is from that language too. Even if Windows has detailed locale settings, and the MS365 setting also let you set a date format, Teams just ignores it. By the way, did I mention languages other than english are machine-translated and hilariously wrong.
Would you also not block this at the firewall on individual nodes: if you block incoming incoming UDP on port 631 that would at least eliminate one of the two entry points, right?

There is no detail in the article about the other.
Agreed, I feel like there's an inherent nobility in putting effort into something. If I took the time to write a book and have it proof-read and edited and so on: perhaps it's actually worth my time.

Lowering the bar to write books is "good" but increases the noise to signal ratio.

I'm not 100% certain how to give another proof-of-work, but what I've started doing is narrating my blog posts - though AI voices are getting better too.. :\
I’d argue that a reasonable person would understand these terms to confer an unrestricted ownership interest.

I’m putting this good into a metaphorical container and taking it to a metaphorical till. This implies a sort of tangibility, a property of physical goods that I’d walk out of the metaphorical store to own.
Back in the 80's, I read a book about computer programmer productivity...they tracked what programmers were doing, and how much time programmers spend each day doing it.

They found that programmers spend 7% of their day walking. The authors of the book were jumping all over that--why, you'd get 7% more output if the programmers just sat down and did their jobs......
Propaganda works by repeating the same in different forms. Now it is easier to have different forms of the same, hence, more propaganda. Also, it is much easier to iinfluence whatever people write by influencing the tool they use to write.

Imagine that AI tools sway generated sentences to be slightly close, in summarisation space, to the phrase "eat dirt" or anything. What would happen?
You can prompt/train the AI to add a couple of random minor errors. They're trained from human text after all, they can pretend to be as human as you like.
I am not arguing about the merits of LLMs.

Just that we had unleashed models for a while now and the only popular use case for them has been deep fakes. Otherwise it's just boring, generic content that is no different to what you find on X or 4chan. It's 2024 not 1924 - the world has already seen every horror imaginable many times over.

And not sure why you think if they were mass scale it would change anything. Most of the world prefers moderated products and services.
Lawsuits based on what? Copyright?

People crying for copyright in the context of AI training don't understand what copyright is, how it works and when it applies.

What they think how copyright works: When you take someones work as inspiration then everything you produce form that counts as derivative work.

How copyright actually works: The input is irrelevant, only the output matters. Thus derivative work is what explicitly contains or resembles underlying work, no matter if it was actually based on that or it is just happenstance / coincidence.

Thus AI models are safe from copyright lawsuits as long as they filter out any output which comes too close to known material. Everything else is fine, even if the model was explicitly trained on commercial copyrighted material only.

In other words: The concept of intellectual property is completely broken and that is old news.
Generally, the people who seriously let genAI write for them without copious editing, were the ones who were bad writers, with poor taste anyway.

I use GenAI everyday as an idea generator and thought partner, but I would never simply copy and paste the output somewhere for another person to read and take seriously.

You have to treat these things adversarially and pick out the useful from the garbage.

It just lets people who created junk food, create more junk food for people who consume junk food. But there is the occasional nugget of good ideas that you can apply to your own organic human writing.
It’s because it now affects hackers and before it only affected musicians.
"reduce the quoted battery life of the phone" - This is the bit that presumably they don't want to do.

Reducing the top-line specs of the phone means that it might fall down in comparisons to others in a spec-comparison.

I presume they would rather move the conversation into customer-land, i.e. once you've bought your phone they talk about how they are acting to preserve your expensive device.
Why do we need art to be 10000x cheaper? There was already more than enough art being produced. Now we just have infinite waves of slop drowning out everything that’s actually good.
Then I don't get it.

Just the same way that I don't get Temu. I buy a lot of stuff on Aliexpress. Mostly electronics, odd tools, materials for hobby projects etc. I would think Temu would be interested in my business. But every time I've clicked on a product link there I get this stilly spin-the-wheel nonsense. Which just represents a hurdle I have to get past to order something. After you get that a few times you grow tired of it. So now I never click on Temu links. I go on Aliexpress instead because they'll sell it to me without this whole nonsense.

Again, how does this help them make money? Is it a kind of filter that is supposed to repulse people like me and attract people who find this kind of interface attractive? Presumably because they can get more money out of people with certain traits?

I don't get it how interposing a lot of nonsense between me and the things I am trying to access or buy is supposed to boost revenue. Can someone explain this to me?
Agreed that it's not actually a big deal (hence "here"), but it does strengthen a point that the C syntax wasn't designed carefully after all. The current C type syntax was completely accidental and any reasonable design could have avoided that. If that was too late for some reason, one could have defined a new parallel syntax that solves this problem. In fact C++ did so via its new function declaration syntax `auto f(...) -> ...`. Guess why...
> you have to make useful proxy measures what to read and what not

yes, obviously. But AI slop makes those proxy measures significantly more complicated. Critical thinking is not magic - it is still a guess, and people are obviously worse at distinguishing AI bullshit from human bullshit.
> nothing is going substitute critical thinking and putting in effort to separate wheat from the chaff.

The problem is that wheat:chaff ratio used to be 1:100, and soon it's going to become 1:100 million. I think you're severely underestimating the amount of effort it's going to take to find real information in the sea of AI generated content.
The negation of 'I cannot trust' is not 'I could always trust' but rather 'I could sometimes trust'.

Nor is trust meant to mean something is absolute and unquestionable. I may trust someone, but with enough evidence I can withdraw trust.
I don't know: I think this tends to be a bit illusory. When it works you think "of course! This is great!"

But I've found as often the obvious brilliant solution while I'm away from the problem doesn't survive 5 minutes contact with all the constraints I forgot about while I was away from it.

Basically I think we count the hits, and discount the grind necessary to produce them.
This is interesting — has anyone tried something like this with Elasticsearch or maybe Milvus/Meilisearch/Typesense? I know those are popular for vector searches, but I haven't seen anything specific for improving GitHub searches like this.

I'm curious how this compares performance-wise, especially when it comes to large repositories with tons of issues and PRs. Also, how scalable is it? I feel like semantic search has a lot of potential here, but does anyone know if GitHub itself has plans to integrate something similar?
Your missing the point of the article. It acknowledges that the ratios are absurd. The question is why and how did the people that have this capital that you describe as belonging to investors get the capital in the first place.
Machines were not able to deal with non-formal problems.
Eliza effectively passed Turing tests. I think you gotta do a little better than that, and 'ha ha I made you mad' isn't actually the best defense of your position.
Not using the "WAN" attack if you are using a firewall config that stops that on public wifi.

I do not understand how the mDNS entry point works.
Legal consequences, but they'd have to be paired with reforms in academic culture. It's worth considering how academic incentives (e.g., "publish or perish" pressures) contribute to this environment, where some cut ethical corners just to stay competitive. Ethical publishing practices and transparent peer review processes are equally essential in restoring trust and ensuring that science remains an antifragile system.
Maybe that's the point? Getting people to quit instead of having to do layoffs.
It's not legal, but it's also not theft.
Not really. While both relate to SHA-1, those are two quite different issues.

The Shattered attack was an actual demonstration of a long-known weakness in SHA-1 that allows creating practical collisions.

This one is more an exploration of the question whether a malicious actor can create a standard that looks good, but is actually weak. Those questions got quite a bit of attention in that time due to the Snowden leaks, and the realization that this actually happened at least in one case (Dual EC DRBG, which, technically, was already known before Snowden, but only got major attention afterwards).
Heh ,Then python and php are included as C web servers too
Information is not like physical products if you ask me. When the information is wrong, it's value flips from positive to negative. You might be paying less for progress, but you are not progressing slower, you are progressing in the wrong direction.
> Agreed, I feel like there's an inherent nobility in putting effort into something. If I took the time to write a book and have it proof-read and edited and so on: perhaps it's actually worth my time.

Said the scribe upon hearing about the printing press.
I mean, it's not a meme..

I included a few more "private" words than I should and I even tried to narrate things to prove I wasn't an AI.

https://blog.dijit.sh/gcp-the-only-good-cloud/

Not sure what else I should do, but it's pretty clear that it's not AI written (mostly because it's incoherent) even without grammar mistakes.
There's other forms of AI than LLM's and to be honest I thought the 2+2=5 was obviously an analogy.

Yet 2 comments have immediately jumped on it.
I feel like I’m being gaslit about these AI code tools. I’ve got the paid copilot through work and I’ve just about never had it do anything useful ever.

I’m working on a reasonably large rails app and it can’t seem to answer any questions about anything, or even auto fill the names of methods defined in the app. Instead it just makes up names that seem plausible. It’s literally worse than the built in auto suggestions of vs code, because at least those are confirmed to be real names from the code.

Maybe these tools work well on a blank project where you are building basic login forms or something. But certainly not on an established code base.
If humans have a talent for anything, it is mechanising the pollution of the things we need most.

The earth. Information. Culture. Knowledge.
capitalism and "money as an abstract concept" are unrelated.
> I envy anyone that can do what you do.

Nah, almost everyone does what parent does.

Basing your understanding of the industry on HN/blogs/social is just an apex fallacy, it seems everyone is a FAANG 10x-er with plenty of oos contributions. That's far from reality. I gave up on programming in my personal time almost immediately. I've picked up hobbies that require physical work instead.
The person who insists copying isn’t theft would probably point out that piracy is something done on the high seas.

From the context of the comment it was pretty clear that they were using theft as shorthand for taking without permission.
In Soviet planet Earth AI gets tired of you.
That's what I expect future to be like, anyways
It’s just an example.
Hah. beat me to it. I knew someone else would be weird enough to mention this guy. A very interesting guy. I recall he has gone dumpster diving behind libraries to save information that has not been digitized.
I think at this point "suckless" (as a quality) is pretty much understood in the same way as "free software", and firmly distinct from "suckless.org e.V." or "Free Software Foundation".
Show HN: Comparisons – 3D modelling with TripoSR 1.4 vs. Meshy
no obviously apparent tracking*
I envision a future where the internet is entirely bots talking to each other and people have just gone outside to talk face to face, the only place that’s actually real.
I have the same issue with problems I solve in my sleep (or think that I’ve solved). I’ll wake up in the middle of the night and think “this is going to be soo good” and then the next day when I’m sitting in front of the keyboard I realise it was nonsense.
This is a very fuzzy memory, but I remember a report of a smart device that "helpfully" automatically connects to other devices nearby, forming a mesh network.

In other words, even if you never connect your TV to your WIFI, it might be enough that your neighbour does.
I’m tired of farming - Someone in 5000 BC

I’m tired of electricity - Someone in 1905

I’m tired of consumer apps - Someone in 2020

The revolution will happen regardless. If you participate you can shape it in the direction you believe in.

AI is the most innovative thing to happen in software in a long time.

And personally AI is FUN. It sparks joy to code using AI. I don’t need anyone else’s opinion I’m having a blast. It’s a bit like rails for me in that sense.

This is HACKER news. We do things because it’s fun.

I can tackle problems outside of my comfort zone and make it happen.

If all you want to do is ship more 2020s era B2B SaaS till kingdom come no one is stopping you :P
I made a basic version of this to help me pass the UK driving test, which is fairly difficult: 40 minutes of virtually error-free driving is required and the pass rate is 50%.

It's 2.5D, I used a 3D engine but the graphics are just satellite imagery projected on to a terrain map.
Guess what? Now the computers will learn to do that so they can more convincingly pass a turing test.
It's hard to write code for computers, but it's harder to write code for humans
> While the professional looking text could have been already wrong, the likelihood was smaller...

I don't criticise you for it, because that strategy is both rational and popular. But you never checked the accuracy of your information before so you have no way of telling if it has gotten more or less accurate with the advent of AI. You were testing for whether someone of high social intelligence wanted you to believe what they said rather than if what they said was true.
You would think so, but take a look at Lost Media Wiki - https://lostmediawiki.com/Category:Lost_TV

Lot of stuff from 90s-2010s in there.
I think about it differently. Before computers had to be given extremely precise and completely unambiguous instructions, now they can handle some ambiguity as well. You still have the precise output if you want it, it didn’t go away.

Btw I’m also tired of AI, but this is one thing that’s not so bad

Edit: before someone mentions fuzzy logic, I’m not talking about the input of a function being fuzzy, I’m talking about the instructions themselves, the function is fuzzy.
People could prompt for authenticity, adding subtle mistakes, etc. I hope that AI as a whole will help people writing better, if reading back the text. It is a bit like "The Substance" movie: a "better" version of ourselves.
The most depressing thing for me is the feeling that I simply cannot trust anything that has been written in the past 2 years or so and up until the day that I die.

What AI is going to teach people is that they don't actually need to trust half as many things as they thought they did, but that they do need to verify what's left.

This has always been the case. We've just been deferring to 'truster organizations' a lot recently, without actually looking to see if they still warrant having our trust when they change over time.
Meeting Likeminded Builders (In Dubai)
When i started by first startup i was moving soo slowly... i had no idea what i was doing.

I then failed to reach PMF

I tried again,

but this time i was lucky enough to meet a few other people in my college who were also building.

I failed again,

but this time I had moved muuuch faster and gotten much further.

I realized that working alongside other builders is an unfair advantage!!

I want to make sure that more people can benefit from this unfair advantage.

I am based in Dubai and despite the abundance of talent and VC money still no builder house...

I want am launching a hackerhouse (arrayah) in Dubai and would feedback.

What do you want to see?

What would convince you to join?

Do you have anyone in mind who could be a good fit?

P.S. both me and my cofounder have worked in VC so we want to help founders in the house fundraising in MENA :))
a) Not easy to use by average person

b) No, certain things aren't taboo anymore, but new taboos emerged. Watch a few older movies and count "wow this wouldn't fly nowadays" moments

c) This was exactly the same use case the internet had back when it was fun, and full of creativity.
I wonder if this is a legal issue if they bypass HDCP and record or snapshot content from a privileged domain?