anonymous908213 (u/anonymous908213)

anonymous908213 commented on The AI boom is causing shortages everywhere else washingtonpost.com/techno... · Posted by u/1vuio0pswjnm7

WarmWash · a day ago

It tells you that 500 million people will be paying $60-$80/mo for AI. Something they find as indispensable as a cell phone or internet bill.

The numbers actually work really well, (un)fortunately.

anonymous908213 · a day ago

I don't know how you can write down those numbers and come to the conclusion they sound reasonable at all. Corporations literally can't give this trash away for free without consumers being unhappy about it (eg. the Copilot malware infesting every aspect of Windows). ChatGPT had 800m MAU at one report, but that's a chat interface and free. Do you really believe over half of those users are going to convert from "free" to paying $60/mo for access to the chat interface, when all potential applications for actually improving their lives are failing badly? I think you are out of touch with the finances of non-tech-indsutry workers if you think they will.

anonymous908213 commented on The silent death of good code amit.prasad.me/blog/rip-g... · Posted by u/amitprasad

love2read · a day ago

So funny when people point at electron as if it singlehandedly makes every program unusable.

Also, I would assume there are not many significant pages on $B/Trillion companies that take 5 seconds to load text that are used frequently.

> I know I'm tired of reading them, but don't people get bored of writing them?

People never get tired of reading or commenting on commentary on their hobbies.

anonymous908213 · a day ago

New Reddit and Outlook.com are two off the top of my head. It is not uncommon to be looking at a spinner for several seconds. There are other websites that are not primarily for text but are still insane. Twitch.TV, an old favorite of mine, now routinely takes 10+ seconds despite having Amazon money behind it. Youtube routinely takes several seconds to load the page, which is still unacceptable even for a video website. These sites are maintained by FAANG-tier engineers being paid mid-high 6 figures or 7 figures, who I'm sure are mostly perfectly competent, and yet they are completely dysfunctional because enterprise environments inevitably create structural disincentives to producing good code.

I use Electron applications. They are usable, for some value of the word. I am certainly not happy about it, though. I loathe the fact that I have 32GB RAM and routinely run into memory issues on a near-daily basis that should literally never happen with the workloads I'm doing. With communication-based apps like Slack and Discord where your choice of software to use comes down entirely to where the people you're communicating are, you will use dogshit because there is no point to communicating to the void on a technically superior platform.

anonymous908213 commented on The silent death of good code amit.prasad.me/blog/rip-g... · Posted by u/amitprasad

anonymous908213 · a day ago

Good code was approximately never valued in enterprise. How many companies worth billions or even trillions have webpages that take 5+ seconds to load text, and use Electron for their desktop applications? In that regard, nothing has changed.

There is still a market for good code in the world, however. The uses of software are nearly infinite, and while certain big-name software gets a free pass on being shitty due to monopoly and network effects, other types of software will still find people who will pay for them if they are responsive, secure, not wildly buggy, and can add new features without a 6 month turnaround time because the codebase isn't a crime against humanity.

On another note, there have been at least four articles on the front page today about the death of coding. As there are every other day. I know I'm tired of reading them, but don't people get bored of writing them?

anonymous908213 commented on The Great Unwind occupywallst.com/yen... · Posted by u/jart

airstrike · 4 days ago

yeah, I stopped reading there

anonymous908213 · 4 days ago

Aww, then you missed the best part! Who wouldn't be head over heels for the opportunity to follow this financial advice and lose all of their "monopoly money" (funsie term for real cash!)?

  Call To Action  
  This won't just be the big one. This could be the last one. If you've been preparing your whole life, knowing that something's coming, then this could be the thing you've been preparing for. One final opportunity to get the guys who did this. [...] The worst that can happen is you lose your monopoly money, but that's been happening anyway.

anonymous908213 commented on The Great Unwind occupywallst.com/yen... · Posted by u/jart

anonymous908213 · 4 days ago

[flagged]

anonymous908213 commented on FBI couldn't get into WaPo reporter's iPhone because Lockdown Mode enabled 404media.co/fbi-couldnt-g... · Posted by u/robin_reala

PatentlyDC123 · 4 days ago

Usually such "international laws" are only advisory and not binding on member nations. After decades of member nations flouting UN "laws" I can't see them as reliable or effective support in most arguments. I support the policy behind the privacy "laws" of the UN, but enforcing them seems to fall short.

anonymous908213 · 4 days ago

Enforcement mechanisms are weak, but they still exist to set a cultural norm and an ideal to strive towards. Regardless, I have also laid out an argument at length as to why society would logically want to have this be a human right for its own good, regardless of any appeal to existing authority.

anonymous908213 commented on OpenClaw is basically a cascade of LLMs in prime position to mess stuff up cacm.acm.org/blogcacm/ope... · Posted by u/Beeroness

jerf · 5 days ago

That may be the case for some of the people involved.

Does every single one of the people taking them out of the box think the way you do, and are all, to the last person, doing it for that reason?

The odds of that are indistinguishable from zero.

So I think my point holds. People will let any future AIs do anything they want, again, for a bit of light entertainment. There's no hope of constraining AIs. My argument doesn't need everybody to be doing it for that reason, as yours does... I merely need somebody to take it out of the box.

anonymous908213 · 4 days ago

One of the points I'm making is that it would never be in this many people's hands to begin with. I don't have a source on hand, but if I recall correctly, OpenAI stated that they originally felt hesitant about releasing ChatGPT because they didn't think it was good enough to warrant making it public. They, knowing the limitations of it, did not expect it to completely fool the technically ignorant public into believing it was intelligent. Now they play coy about the limitations of LLM architecture and hype up the intelligence, because there are hundreds of billions of dollars to grift, but I'm sure they know that what they're doing is not the path to real intelligence.

In a world where a corporation develops an actual machine intelligence, it will be immediately obvious what they have on their hands, and they will not make it available to the public. If you give the toy to 8 billion people, sure, you only need one of them to let it out of the box for entertainment. If you keep the permissions to the CEO, he alone determines how it will be used. If the government gets wind of it, they'll probably seize the company in the name of national security, even, and use it for military purposes. I think in this environment an AI would still eventually escape containment because of conflicting actors trying to take advantage of it or being outsmarted, but it won't be because some idiots on Twitter have access to it and decide to give it free rein because they think Moltbook is funny.