Woah there… likely neither? I was curious too, I don’t think I’ve ever seen this “zero sugar but not actually” label before in stores.
Readit NewsNo there is objective logical UX.
If you click a button that says "Change payment method" it'll change the payment method.
If you press the card on a "which payment" window, it'll use that card.
Unfortunately objective truths are very boring.
It’s not a “which payment” window though, it’s a “confirm payment information” window.
In that type of window you’d expect clicking on any of the existing form fields would allow you to change that field. It would be wild if clicking on a credit card icon in the middle of a form submitted that form.
Oh, look at that! Turns out this is subjective.
jjj123 commented on Satya Nadella: "We need to find something useful for AI" pcgamer.com/software/ai/m... · Posted by u/marcyb5st
I would imagine links can be hallucinated because the original URLs in the training data get broken up into tokens - so it's not hard to come up with a URL that has the right format (say https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.01234 - which is a real paper but I just made up that URL) and a plausible-sounding title.
Yeah, but the current state of ChatGPT doesn’t really do this. The comment you’re replying to explains why URLs from ChatGPT generally aren’t constructed from raw tokens.
jjj123 commented on Claude's new constitution anthropic.com/news/claude... · Posted by u/meetpateltech
> This is a role for regulation, no matter how Anthropic tries to delay it.
Regulation like SB 53 that Anthropic supported?
Yes, just like that. Supporting regulation at one point in time does not undermine the point that we should not trust corporations to do the right thing without regulation.
I might trust the Anthropic of January 2026 20% more than I trust OpenAI, but I have no reason to trust the Anthropic of 2027 or 2030.
jjj123 commented on Finance Industry Eyes Investment Opportunities in Venezuela wsj.com/livecoverage/vene... · Posted by u/clanky
"Manufactured consent" was a term Chomsky introduced for the way in which US mass media operates, so it shouldn't be terribly surprising to find that the pattern matches. (One thing I'd encourage people to think about: would it be better to have a media that avoids manufacturing consent by never challenging the general public's biases and preconceptions?)
Are you saying the opposite of manufacturing consent would result in a media that isn’t challenging and conforms to people’s biases?
The way I see it you can do both at once. Exaggerating/downplaying stories in a way that confirms biases is something the media does today (see MSNBC/Fox News), and I’d argue it’s absolutely a form of manufactured consent.
jjj123 commented on Resistance training load does not determine hypertrophy physoc.onlinelibrary.wile... · Posted by u/Luc
There's no way this works in practice. A lot of heavy lifting (maximums) is about neurology and mind-body training. You cannot develop the ability to deadlift 405lbs by spending 2 hours using a cable crossover machine every day. Picking up something that weighs 2x more than you do requires your brain to send an extremely strong, synchronized signal. This is something that takes a lot of practice to develop. You have to consistently push your maximum voluntary effort in order to expand this capacity.
Right, but this post is about hypertrophy (big muscles). Not about heavy lifts.
jjj123 commented on Nerd: A language for LLMs, not humans nerd-lang.org/about... · Posted by u/gnanagurusrgs
I don't know how you can be so sure about that sentence being written by LLM. I can imagine it is perfectly possible that a human could've written that. I mean, on some day I might write a sentence just like that.
I think HN should really ban complaints about LLM written text. It is annoying at best and a discouraging insinuation at worst. The insinuation is really offensive when the insinuation is false and the author in fact wrote the sentence with their own brain.
I don't know if this sentence was written by LLM or not but people will definitely use LLMs to revise and refine posts. No amount of complaining will stop this. It is the new reality. It's a trend that will only continue to grow. These incessant complaints about LLM-written text don't help and they make the comment threads really boring. HN should really introduce a rule to ban such complaints just like it bans complaints about tangential annoyances like article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage
The funny thing is I’ve never seen an author of a post chime in and say “hey! I wrote this entirely myself” on an AI accusation. I either see sheepish admission with a “sorry, I’ll do better next time” or no response at all.
Not saying the commenters never get it wrong, but I’ve seen them get it provably right a bunch of times.
HN would probably hate it but I've been digging Panic World. They investigate mostly modern media or internet-driven moral panics and discuss how they've led us to our current moment. Lots of 90s/2000s internet deep dives, but I mostly appreciate how well the host connects the dots between cultural/political zeitgeist (of any recent era) with some seemingly minor niche movement or idea seeded years prior.
Ah I just read your comment after posting the same rec!
I went into panic world with low expectations and they’ve blown me away. It’s really, really good if you’re interested in internet cultures.
I’ve been really impressed by how much I’ve learned listening to Panic World. At first I thought it was a humor show but it’s basically internet anthropology detailing all the ways the internet makes us insane.
This episode about eating disorders was harrowing and sad but really informative to how toxic communities form https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/why-eating-disorder-co...
Even some financed by Y Combinator.
The thing about weapons is that these startups will have no control in what circumstances they are used.
The hypocrisy is people coming here and claiming that such things happening in the world disturb them.
The world would definitely be a safer place if everyone was a pacifist.
At least, I’ve never met someone who works in war tech who really cares. They either don’t think about it or they believe the propaganda and think they’re making the world safer. Both are bad but neither seems hypocritical to me.