rubyfan (u/rubyfan) - Readit News

rubyfan commented on Stop generating, start thinking localghost.dev/blog/stop-... · Posted by u/frizlab

rubyfan · a day ago

>* I find it hard to justify the value of investing so much of my time perfecting the art of asking a machine to write what I could do perfectly well in less time than it takes to hone the prompt.*

This sums up my interactions with LLMs

rubyfan commented on A new bill in New York would require disclaimers on AI-generated news content niemanlab.org/2026/02/a-n... · Posted by u/giuliomagnifico

Balinares · 4 days ago

Don't ding the amusingly scoped animosity, it's very convenient: we get to say stuff like "Sure, our laws may keep us at the mercy of big corps unlike these other people, BUT..." and have a ready rationalization for why our side is actually still superior when you look at it. Imagine what would happen if the populace figured it's getting collectively shafted in a way others may not.

rubyfan · 4 days ago

>Imagine what would happen if the populace figured it's getting collectively shafted in a way others may not.

They already believe that and it’s used to keep us fighting each other.

rubyfan commented on AI is killing B2B SaaS nmn.gl/blog/ai-killing-b2... · Posted by u/namanyayg

rubyfan · 5 days ago

“Software is eating the world” and “AI is eating software”

rubyfan commented on Anthropic AI tool sparks selloff from software to broader market bloomberg.com/news/articl... · Posted by u/garbawarb

PostOnce · 6 days ago

If it turns out that AI isn't much more productive, it could also turn out that people still believe it is, and therefore don't value software companies.

If that happens, some software companies will struggle to find funding and collapse, and people who might consider starting a software company will do something else, too.

Ultimately that could mean less competition for the same pot of money.

I wonder.

rubyfan · 6 days ago

I left software about 10 years ago for this reason. I saw engineers being undervalued, management barriers to productivity and higher compensation possibilities for non-tech functions.

rubyfan commented on Self Driving Car Insurance lemonade.com/car/explaine... · Posted by u/KellyCriterion

microtherion · 10 days ago

I'm quite skeptical of Tesla's reliability claims. But for exactly that reason, I welcome a company like Lemonade betting actual money on those claims. Either way, this is bound to generate some visibility into the actual accident rates.

rubyfan · 10 days ago

Lemonade will have some actual claim data to support this already, not relying on the word of Tesla.

rubyfan commented on Vitamin D supplements cut heart attack risk by 52%. Why? empirical.health/blog/vit... · Posted by u/brandonb

rubyfan · 10 days ago

Looks like this is a freebie article in a permission marketing campaign designed to build engagement and then get you to use their services.

rubyfan commented on Self Driving Car Insurance lemonade.com/car/explaine... · Posted by u/KellyCriterion

thelastgallon · 11 days ago

Its neither self-driving, nor autonomous, eventually not even a car! (as Tesla slowly exits the car business). It will be 'insurance' on Speculation as a service, as Tesla skyrockets to $20T market cap. Tesla will successfully transition from a small revenue to pre-revenue company: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYJdKW-UnFQ

The last few years of Tesla 'growth' show how this transition is unfolding. S and X production is shutdown, just a few more models to shutdown.

rubyfan · 11 days ago

I wonder if they will try to sell off the car business once they can hype up something else. It seems odd to just let the car business die.

rubyfan commented on Self Driving Car Insurance lemonade.com/car/explaine... · Posted by u/KellyCriterion

kjksf · 11 days ago

Because that's the law of the land currently.

The product you buy is called "FSD Supervised". It clearly states you're liable and must supervise the system.

I don't think there's law that would allow Tesla (or anyone else) to sell a passenger car with unsupervised system.

If you take Waymo or Tesla Robotaxi in Austin, you are not liable for accidents, Google or Tesla is.

That's because they operate on limited state laws that allow them to provide such service but the law doesn't allow selling such cars to people.

That's changing. Quite likely this year we will have federal law that will allow selling cars with fully unsupervised self-driving, in which case the insurance/liability will obviously land on the maker of the system, not person present in the car.

rubyfan · 11 days ago

Waymo is also a livery service which you normally aren’t liable for as a passenger of taxi or limousine unless you have deep pockets. /IANAL

rubyfan commented on Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app macrumors.com/2026/01/28/... · Posted by u/pier25

idiotsecant · 12 days ago

I think that is in fact exactly what GP is suggesting.

rubyfan · 12 days ago

I don’t read it that way. I think the point is it doesn’t make sense that apple is taking a cut of a transaction that is not in their payment rails*. Apple can still be compensated for their App store service without using a model that takes 30% of all transactions, e.g. a listing fee, an app review fee, etc.

*And anything on their payment rails should have a normal transaction fee, e.g. Stripe’s retail rate is 2.9% + $0.30.

rubyfan commented on Apple to soon take up to 30% cut from all Patreon creators in iOS app macrumors.com/2026/01/28/... · Posted by u/pier25

saimiam · 12 days ago

If a user almost exclusively uses the Patreon ios app to consume the artist’s content and likes to live inside the ios ecosystem for frictionless payments using the card on file/privacy/UX/whatever, then I feel apple should get to set the terms of engagement.

If you were a chain store in a high end mall where customers cars were all parked for free by valets, mall staff knew their names, and generally made them feel special, you’d not balk at a higher commission to be paid to mall for access to their customers, right? Airports come to mind for this.

I believe apple lets you set whatever price you want on their store, just not tell customers that they could get a lower price elsewhere/on the vendor’s website (I don’t follow App Store policies very closely so my info is probably out of date).

rubyfan · 12 days ago

I don’t think anyone suggests Apple should get nothing for their app store services, just that it shouldn’t be 30% of every transaction processed through every iOS app.

u/rubyfan

KarmaCake day3388June 30, 2012View Original