sdwr (u/sdwr) - Readit News

sdwr commented on Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes bitsaboutmoney.com/archiv... · Posted by u/dangrossman

650 · 4 days ago

This article isn't vague at all. It references various sources, and uses precise language (if you can recognize it) to convey its message. Yes, innocent until proven guilty, but the fact that the government has "lesser" educated Fraud analysts, chooses to ask for reimbursement of overbilling, and many more nuanced topics talked about in the article is not vague.

sdwr · 4 days ago

It's very indirect. The message is "the government is soft on fraud, partially because of liberal values", but the author does everything possible to not actually say it.

sdwr commented on Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes bitsaboutmoney.com/archiv... · Posted by u/dangrossman

sdwr · 4 days ago

All I remember hearing about this is how creepy and racist it was to look for kids at a black-owned daycare. It was a scam the whole time?

sdwr commented on AI and Trust (2023) schneier.com/blog/archive... · Posted by u/engelo_b

stickfigure · 6 days ago

Rubbish. Humans behave just as erratically as systems. Maybe the problem is that you have the wrong intuitions about humans?

sdwr · 4 days ago

An AI "friend bot" could talk like an individual, but be controlled by a network that is making global decisions - what if one of its goals is reducing social unrest by undermining the confidence of users with certain political views? What if the network is 25% owned by China, or by Chevron? What if it's perfectly benevolent, but still choosing what to tell you based on its strategy?

sdwr commented on Review of 1984 by Isaac Asimov (1980) newworker.org/ncptrory/19... · Posted by u/doruk101

elephanlemon · 4 days ago

Interesting how pedantic he is!

> Then, too, Orwell had the technophobic fixation that every technological advance is a slide downhill. Thus, when his hero writes, he 'fitted a nib into the penholder and sucked it to get the grease off. He does so 'because of a feeling that the beautiful creamy paper deserved to be written on with a real nib instead of being scratched with an ink-pencil'.

> Presumably, the 'ink-pencil' is the ball-point pen that was coming into use at the time that 1984 was being written. This means that Orwell describes something as being written' with a real nib but being 'scratched' with a ball-point. This is, however, precisely the reverse of the truth. If you are old enough to remember steel pens, you will remember that they scratched fearsomely, and you know ball-points don't.

> This is not science fiction, but a distorted nostalgia for a past that never was. I am surprised that Orwell stopped with the steel pen and that he didn't have Winston writing with a neat goose quill.

sdwr · 4 days ago

I don't think it's pedantic, he's trying to make a broad point about his mentality, using the detail as the defining example

sdwr commented on A sane but bull case on Clawdbot / OpenClaw brandon.wang/2026/clawdbo... · Posted by u/brdd

cj · 6 days ago

Tangent: what is the appeal of the “no capitalization” writing style? I never know what message the author is intending to convey when I see all lower case.

Normally I can ignore it, but the font on this blog makes it hard to distinguish where sentences start and end (the period is very small and faint).

sdwr · 6 days ago

Informal, casual, friendly

sdwr commented on AI and Trust (2023) schneier.com/blog/archive... · Posted by u/engelo_b

stickfigure · 6 days ago

I can't accept this strange definitional divide between interpersonal trust and social trust. Trust is an infinitely grey experience, and varies situation to situation and time to time.

Trust is just a word we use to describe how confident we are that the future will correspond to our expectations. Friends can lose the money you gave them to buy something, credit card machines can fail, AIs can order you the wrong product, I could get in a car accident on the way to the store. Do I "trust" that these schemes will go smoothly? Well, mostly (except the AI one).

I don't see a category error because there aren't categories here.

sdwr · 6 days ago

It's absolutely the correct distinction to draw. AI will be able to present as a person while behaving as a system. We don't have intuitions for dealing with that.

sdwr commented on Coding assistants are solving the wrong problem bicameral-ai.com/blog/int... · Posted by u/jinhkuan

viraptor · 7 days ago

> but it doesn't refuse to write the code without first being told why it wouldn't be a better idea to do X first

Then don't ask it to write code? If you ask any recent high quality model to discuss options, tradeoffs, design constraints, refine specs it will do it for you until you're sick and tired of it finding real edge cases and alternatives. Ask for just code and you'll get just code.

sdwr · 7 days ago

They are way better at code-related tasks than design or strategy ones. Anything involving users or business strategy or a "why" is vague and misguided, they have no insight.

sdwr commented on How to explain Generative AI in the classroom dalelane.co.uk/blog/?p=58... · Posted by u/thinkingaboutit

sdwr · 10 days ago

I think this is a backwards approach, especially for children.

Gen AI is magical, it makes stuff appear out of thin air!

And it's limited, everything it makes kinda looks the same

And it's forgetful, it doesn't remember what it just did

And it's dangerous! It can make things that never happened

Starting with theory might be the simplest way to explain, but it leaves out the hook. Why should they care?

sdwr commented on Claude Code's GitHub page auto closes issues after 60 days github.com/anthropics/cla... · Posted by u/dcreater

dcreater · 11 days ago

Claude Code has over 5000 open issues. And this is after issues that are inactive for 60 days being auto closed. Such a policy is facetious to say the least. What is more perplexing is why they don't use Claude to triage the issues?

sdwr · 10 days ago

I think the idea is that nobody will be using CC in 5 years. If anthropic loses, nobody will use it. If anthropic wins, still nobody will use it! The value is in the model solving problems, and CC is just the hacky vessel for that, not the end goal. If they believe in themselves, polishing the product is a waste of time.