lucianbr

6 ms·

1.
by lucianbr 4d ago
As long as we don't underestimate the power of motivated reasoning for other certain people as well, who like AI coding for various ideological or financial reasons.
2.
by lucianbr 27d ago
I think microservices are supposed to be easier to deploy independently, that's the whole point. And if they are not, it means you're just doing it wrong. But in truth, all the projects with microservices I have seen in real life
3.
by lucianbr 29d ago
Maybe say what you think they were saying? What is it with these maximally ambiguous comments? To me "Are you aware of the world you live in?" suggests "If you don't even know this, you don't know anything. This i
4.
by lucianbr 29d ago
> Are you aware of the world you live in? Certainly this world comprises many other things than the Holocaust and IBM's support of it. Perhaps your awareness is lacking if you think that is the main thing to be aware of in this worl
5.
by lucianbr 1mo ago
May be so, still your quote doesn't make any sense as a reply to my comment. "This article is about nothing". "Well of course it is, they say right on the page they talked to some people".
6.
by lucianbr 1mo ago
The issue is "the matter" completely lacks any substance. "An insider told me NVidia spent 10 billions on hamburgers yesterday." "An insider told me NVidia is thinking about maybe spending up to 10 billions on hambu
7.
by lucianbr 1mo ago
My thought exactly. "May guarantee" is meaningless nonsense. > Nvidia has revised its plans to support a proposed OpenAI data center project in Ohio and is now expected to initially guarantee less than $120 billion There is n
8.
by lucianbr 1mo ago
There is hardware attestation that prevents a perfect sandbox from being possible. Unless you know how to build a sandbox that can simulate a TPM with a key inside that only Google knows. Or something like that. I'm not an expert but t
9.
by lucianbr 2mo ago
For me it's the rythm. It's a list of chapters, each with a list of subchapters, plenty of bulleted lists, and paragraphs of close to equal size with sentences of close to equal size. Everything is trying to be an element with an
10.
by lucianbr 2mo ago
Gee I wonder if anyone on HN might have some ulterior reason to write such a statement, without it being true.
11.
by lucianbr 2mo ago
> The "interesting new phenomenon", obviously, is the potential of the generalization of what expressed in the title. Why is this thing so difficult to name and you need to describe it in such a roundabout way? "Drones mig
12.
by lucianbr 2mo ago
> Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic. Seems ths qualifies in spad
13.
by lucianbr 2mo ago
What's the difference between using GPT to write the prompt to GPT, and "thinking"? The LLM uses the first tokens to predict more tokens, and then uses those tokens to predict even more tokens.
14.
by lucianbr 3mo ago
My entire point was that some people are able to change their position.
15.
by lucianbr 3mo ago
> Someone who does not believe in god will not be convinced to believe by a proof of god's existence I'm sure some atheists could be convinced. The rule "all atheists will reject evidence of God" seems false. The ru
16.
by lucianbr 3mo ago
I do review, if only whatever I do was the norm for everyone :) Do you see lots of posts about new compilers and languages and language features on HN in the last year? Maybe I just missed them. I'd love to read more posts like that an
17.
by lucianbr 3mo ago
> better compilers, more ergonomic languages If anything it seems wide deployment of LLMs would go against this. When nobody writes code by hand anymore, who will care about the ergonomics of programming languages? And even if a few do c
18.
by lucianbr 3mo ago
I wonder if a probabilistic compiler would be fine for the people arguing this. One that sometimes produces machine code that does something else, and sometimes produces machine code that is just broken and does nothing useful. From the sam
19.
by lucianbr 3mo ago
Lots of people seem to think that you don't need to learn how to [scan a network], all you need to learn in this brave new world is how to prompt the agent to [scan a network]. Replace the content in brackets with anything.
20.
by lucianbr 4mo ago
If the other people in the org are using LLMs to a similar degree, any question to which an LLM can provide a good answer to will never get sent. How useful are the draft replies then?
21.
by lucianbr 4mo ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal#O... > After news broke out of Volkswagen cheating on diesel emissions, multiple other vehicle manufacturers got caught falsifying emissions data, as well a
22.
by lucianbr 4mo ago
It starts with some things that minimize the lawsuit area, but over time it transforms into a habit of lying. It's company policy, you know? Don't question, just execute.
23.
by lucianbr 5mo ago
Obviously most CEOs think it's going somewhere where AI is the most important thing, and you must use a lot of it, for everything. If you just insist on putting AI in everything, you are doing as good a job as most CEOs right now. Was
24.
by lucianbr 5mo ago
What was I avoiding with those?
25.
by lucianbr 5mo ago
> you don't have a culture where Yeah, and? Not everyone is in control of the culture of the organization they work in. I suspect most people are not. Is everyone on HN CEOs and CTOs?
26.
by lucianbr 5mo ago
> "Selling is legal, and fucking is legal; but selling fucking is not legal." I don't get it. The literal interpretation is a clear joke, as you say. So what's the point that it is making? To be clear, I think the law
27.
by lucianbr 5mo ago
How do you figure? I don't have a problem with Carlin, but with people who quote him as a source of wisdom. The commenter who quoted him here in the thread meant to make a joke and I didn't get it? I thought he quoted him as a poi
28.
by lucianbr 5mo ago
People forget Carlin was a comedian. "It's a big club and you ain't in it". Obviously the problem is the club is too small, that's why for most of the people it is true that they are not part of it. "Half the p
29.
by lucianbr 5mo ago
To me it looks like this: If you are not an insider with special info and special access, no matter what you do in the market, you eventually lose to the insiders. So, if you blur the details a bit, you're just giving your money to the
30.
by lucianbr 5mo ago
I find it very hard to understand why so many people and institutions are still participating in markets that are obviously full of insider trading. It's basically just giving money away to the insiders. Why do people do this?

More ›