The problem with hoarding is that, on the whole, the hoarded items are worthless. There’s too much noise and too little signal. Finding the gems takes an active effort, which author found daunting. Hoarders usually need help from the outside, and if they don’t get that help, it’s IMO fair to throw it all out.

Bing has a brand problem.

Why does the Author choose to ignore the "General" in AGI?

Can ChatGPT drive a car? No, we have specialized models for driving vs generating text vs image vs video etc etc. Maybe ChatGPT could pass a high school chemistry test but it certainly couldn't complete the lab exercises. What we've built is a really cool "Algorithm for indexing generalized data", so you can train that Driving model very similarly to how you train the Text model without needing to understand the underlying data that well.

The author asserts that because ChatGPT can generate text about so many topics that it's general, but it's really only doing 1 thing and that's not very general.

Correct. I will say the following as a STEM person that was lucky enough to have an art bachelor as well. One side of the world, the STEM nerds that have never understood nor experienced the inherently inefficient process of making art for lack of talent and predisposition, have won the game of capitalism many times over thanks to the incredible 40-years momentum of tech progress. Now they're trying to convince everyone else that art is stoopid, as proven by the fact that it's just a probabilistic choice away from being fully and utterly replicable. They ignore, willfully and possibly sometimes just for lack of understanding, that art and the creativity behind it is something that operates on a completely different plane than their logical view of the world, and Gen AI is the fundamental enabler letting them unleash all of their contempt for the inefficiency of humanities.

44% of the people prefers the existing model ?

Mostly anti-Chinese bias from Americans, Western Europeans, and people aligned with that axis of power (e.g. Japan). However, on the Japanese internet, I don't see this obsession with taboo Chinese topics like on Hacker News.

People on Hacker News will rave about 天安門事件 but they will never have heard of the South Korean equivalent (cf. 光州事件) which was supported by the United States government.

I try to avoid discussing politics on Hacker News, but I do think it's worth pointing out how annoying it is that Westerners' first ideas with Chinese LLMs is to be a provocative contrarian and see what the model does. Nobody does that for GPT, Claude, etc., because it's largely an unproductive task. Of course there will be moderation in place, and companies will generally follow local laws. I think DeepSeek is doing the right thing by refusing to discuss sensitive topics since China has laws against misinformation, and violation of those laws could be detrimental to the business.

the topic is if a generalised group of people should be free. There's no context needed. The answer is a simple yes by default.