Which open-source projects is AOL known for? A quick Google search isn’t returning much.
Readit Newsjonathanwallace commented on Open source AI is the path forward about.fb.com/news/2024/07... · Posted by u/atgctg
jonathanwallace commented on GitHub having issues today githubstatus.com/incident... · Posted by u/mangoman
Is Github moving to .Net and/or SQLServer, or is it "just" moving everything to Azure?
The latter.
jonathanwallace commented on The Contradictions of Sam Altman wsj.com/articles/chatgpt-... · Posted by u/mfiguiere
tl;dr: Nobody is steering the ship because they don't know they're on a ship. Or that the ocean exists.
It's hard without doxxing myself or calling out specific people and organizations which I'd rather not because I'm a nobody and can't afford lawsuits, but for various reasons I ended up political education and marketing for civics advocacy. Ish. To be semi on topic, I know some people who are published in the WSJ (as well as the people who actually wrote the pieces). I'm also a 3rd generation tech nerd in my mid 30s so I'm very comfortable with the digital world - easily the most so outside of the actual software engineering team.
I've spoken with and to a lot of politicians and candidates from across the US - mostly on the local and state level but some nationally. And journalists from publications that are high profile, professors of legal studies, heads of think tanks, etc.
My read of the situation is that our political class is entangled in a snare of perverse disincentives for action while also being so disassociated from the world outside of their bubble that they've functionally no idea what's going on. Our systems (cultural, political, economic, etc.) have grown exponentially more complex in the past 30 years and those of us on HN (myself included) understand this and why this happened. I'm a 3rd generation tech nerd, I can explain pretty easily how we got here and why things are different. The political class, on the other hand, has had enough power to not need to adapt and to force other people to do things their way. If your 8500 year old senator wants payment by check and to send physical mail, you do it. (Politicians and candidates that would not use the internet were enough of a problem in 2020 that we had to account for it in our data + analyses and do specific no tech outreach). Since they didn't know how the world is changing, they also haven't been considering the effects of the changes at all.
Furthermore, even those of them that have some idea still don't know how to problem solve systems instead of relationships. Complex systems thinking is the key skill needed to navigate these waters, and none of them have it. It's fucking terrifying. At best, they can conceive of systems where everything about them is known and their outputs can be precisely predicted. At best. Complex systems are beyond them.
Add to this that we have a system which has slowly ground itself to a deadlocked halt. Congress has functionally abandoned most of its actual legislative duties because it's way better for sitting congresspeople to not pass any bills - if you don't do anything, then you don't piss any of your constituents off. Or make mistakes. And you can spend more time campaigning.
I left and became a hedonist with a drug problem after a very frank conversation with a colleague who was my political opposite at the time. I'm always open to being wrong, and hearing that they didn't have any answer either was a very 'welp, we're fucked' moment. I'm getting better.
As a software developer who found myself elected to state level public office and had to spin-up my education around the legislative process and all of politics, I concur.
Their are only a couple of things I'd add.
As much knowledge as I brought in about technology and the idea of being aware of system thinking, I also brought in a great amount of ignorance about all the other areas that are legislated (healthcare, interplay between local, state, and fedearl issues, budgetary concerns, tax policy, banking, etc.). Good legislation is truly collaborative.
Sadly, for the second part, good legislation is rarer than it should be as much of legislation is about politics and perception of the voters. And voter perceptions are not necessarily logical or reasoned.
This makes it all the more important, IMHO, that everyone who is reasonable, logical, and educated spend their precious, valuable time involving themselves to advocate for elected officials who behave similar in what is essentially a zero-sum game.
p.s. Have faith. I saw enough during my time that gave me reason for that faith. (But that faith requires time and effort -- we don't get good government or democracy for free.) I'm glad to hear you're getting better.
That there exist mockeries of justice is not proof that we should allow them.
100% Agreed.
Rhetorical question: Now what's the enforcement mechanism?
(Also, what's with the downvotes?!?!)
This company is either run by someone who doesn't understand the tech or is willfully fraudulent. ChatGPT and company are far from good enough to be entrusted with law. Having interacted extensively with modern LLMs, I absolutely know something like this would happen:
> Defendant (as dictated by AI): The Supreme Court ruled in Johnson v. Smith in 1978...
> Judge: There was no case Johnson v. Smith in 1978.
LLMs hallucinate, and there is absolutely no space for hallucination in a court of law. The legal profession is perhaps the closest one to computer programming, and absolute precision is required, not a just-barely-good-enough statistical machine.
> there is absolutely no space for hallucination in a court of law
I wish you were factually correct here.
We've seen time and time again where courts are mockeries of the ideal because of the people in them and the faults they bring with them.
E.g. see https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-418_i425.pdf and the documented proof in the dissent contradicting the claims in the ruling.
jonathanwallace commented on Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade apnews.com/article/aborti... · Posted by u/uptown
They get to pick which case they take cert on. There is absolutely gonna be _something_ out there that would allow them to work at the root of Wickard v Filburn. Framing it as "they have to work with this one case they got" is disingenuous.
They intentionally chose to go for the contradictory choice of singling out abortion while not attacking the root -- which suggests to me think this is more about judicial activism than upholding the constitution.
Disingenuous and/or incredibly naive as to how politics have been impacting cases coming before the courts.
It's sad that we reached a point where assuming bad faith from public informers is acceptable and, worse, reasonable.
Worth noting that someone else usually writes the headline for the articles, not the journalist / the author of an article.
jonathanwallace commented on A $5B hoard of aluminum mining.com/web/the-5-bill... · Posted by u/iamdeedubs
The aluminum market is a game.
https://www.cnbc.com/2014/06/03/how-aluminum-became-a-cash-c...
And according to https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/40538538, it always has been.
In the referenced book, the author details how the aluminum cartel was dismantled under the threat of WWII needs because of their failure to promptly address the needs of the United States.
jonathanwallace commented on Ask HN: Why is machine learning easier to learn than basic social skills? · Posted by u/btheshoe
Depending upon how your brain works, i.e. if you're neurodivergent, you may find value in understanding how your brain processes with respect to neurotypicals.
I found value in https://www.amazon.com/dp/1849059276?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2_dt_b_....
I tried that. In the span of a month we had a newborn, I lost my job, the market went into the worst recession since the Great Depression. Later I lost another job and we had to short-sell our house.
We got a divorce and it wasn't because of any of those things (though, they did influence it). It was because my default was to run away from my problems.
Funny thing; the divorce didn't eliminate the stress. It just moved it around in my body and mind and led to near constant anger, anxiety, and panic spasms. I went to see a therapist who taught me to be present with what I'm feeling. (He practiced Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, for anyone interested) I did that in earnest and one day about six months after starting therapy I realized what a mistake I had made in giving up on my marriage.
I reached out and we were able to repair the relationship and we've been back together for over ten years now, thankfully. We're closer than ever. I don't recommend that particular method of repairing a relationship, by the way. ;)
It hasn't always been easy since we got back together but, it has been worth it. We were talking the other day--we talk a lot, important!--and we both agreed that at the start of our relationship, our feelings for each other were very intense. Now that we've been together for over twenty years (with a short "We were on a break!" in the middle) we find that the intensity of our love for each other isn't the same but it is so much deeper than it was at the start and only grows more so the more we're together. We realized that you can only get that if you stay and work on the relationship.