mosura

6 ms·

1.
by mosura 4d ago
You need to grasp that programmers dealt with this cope wave a year ago and know exactly how ideas like yours pan out.
2.
by mosura 5d ago
Math people absolutely are important to things like the SpaceX landing control systems, hypersonic gliders, 5G networks and so on. If you can make breakthroughs on such areas as fluid dynamics, control theory or information theory with AI t
3.
by mosura 5d ago
So let’s say OpenAI cure cancer and put every cancer researcher out of work depriving them of intellectual satisfaction, this would also be a problem? It would certainly impact the field. The fact is these fields are supported by society be
4.
by mosura 5d ago
> What the mathematicians are saying is stop pouring resources that most mathematicians can only dream of accessing into projects that are actively damaging to their field. They face a massive challenge of figuring out how maths can evol
5.
by mosura 5d ago
An impressively strong assertion, even by HN Friday standards.
6.
by mosura 5d ago
If you internalise that AI might actually reach super intelligence then logically the question becomes "so what exactly are humans for if literally everything can be done better by machines?". Then mathematics and all intellectual
7.
by mosura 5d ago
> reached for the boring “luddite” accusations. Where? Straw manning, again. Don’t feed the troll.
8.
by mosura 5d ago
You have proved my point beautifully.
9.
by mosura 5d ago
The absolute trolling that goes on here is related to the point. You are entirely capable of checking what I wrote but insist on trying to drag this out with straw men and misinterpretations. Of course people like you have a problem with AI
10.
by mosura 5d ago
So basically you don’t understand english and/or don’t have the life experience to understand the context of the article. But you are very angry about it. Being able to avoid people like you is the entire selling point. No wonder it an
11.
by mosura 5d ago
> Right all those people protesting outside data centres are bureaucrats? Not what was claimed.
12.
by mosura 5d ago
> AI do absolutely nothing in terms of "avoiding the negative side effects imposed on me by other people" Quite literally the subject of the article.
13.
by mosura 5d ago
There's a general point here which is that the primary use and appeal of AI is to use it to avoid the negative side effects imposed on you by other people. The flip side is the people with the biggest problems with AI are those that su
14.
by mosura 10d ago
That Google failed to turn Google Reader into a giant open blogging social network and instead created G+ is something we will still be wondering after Google itself has stopped existing.
15.
by mosura 10d ago
Both FB and WhatsApp have serious lockin with this sort of thing, far more than X does.
16.
by mosura 10d ago
You don’t understand words?
17.
by mosura 10d ago
The problem with Finder is historic. The classic Mac finder was a work of art, if you are the sort of person that arranges things spatially, but most programmers are not. Hence NeXT created something else which got merged back incoherently
18.
by mosura 16d ago
You are one of the people I am on about. Here you are just wanting to appeal to the guidelines to shut down inconvenient but true statements, again.
19.
by mosura 17d ago
It is kind of nuts how little attention this more-than-controversial-enough aspect of it gets compared to anything else, to the point people don’t even know this about it. I happen to hate Omarchy for the precise reason I don’t want that so
20.
by mosura 17d ago
The fact comments like this get downvoted because what they say is inconvenient is one of the major signs AI has fundamentally broken HN. It was already hard to have technical conversations in public, now there is a contingent determined to
21.
by mosura 22d ago
> The ideal scenario for a hyperscaler is an open architecture at the core with 10+ competing implementations -- including potentially their own. This is what Arm actually is. Arm primarily functions as a talking shop for random insights
22.
by mosura 22d ago
> If you think "chat control" is going to pass, I've a bridge to sell you. I genuinely wish you were right, but you are so naive it is frightening. > The amount of FUD spread about it on here by those working in Adtech
23.
by mosura 22d ago
Which is like creating the Apple App Store for physical products.
24.
by mosura 22d ago
You haven’t lived until you have done a model training run where different stages require mutually incompatible nvidia driver revisions and everything on top.
25.
by mosura 22d ago
So you will defeat chat control by sitting there going “but you don’t have muh gdpr consent for that!”? The whole EU vision is they know what the little people do all the time, think all the time, and spend their money on all the time. For
26.
by mosura 23d ago
Sounds like the Romans had it better than your description of the Chinese, though I am sure in the modern world someone would be stealing the sponges for unfathomable reasons.
27.
by mosura 23d ago
The problem with homeless is also what do you do with them when you find them?
28.
by mosura 23d ago
Why would the EU possibly object to this? It is exactly what they want.
29.
by mosura 25d ago
They are only aligned in that certain parts of the western elites hate both of them. They represent two completely opposite poles, geopolitically. Not horseshoe theory compatible: they are mutually exclusionary.
30.
by mosura 1mo ago
At least we have moved on from the tedious hug-ops response. The question is which features do we want of Github but functioning in a distributed way? Identity? Stars? Issues?

More ›