Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | _ink_'s commentslogin

The supreme court, I guess. What makes you think they would allow that as long as Trump cronies have the majority there?

Believing the message and being able to act on it are two pairs of shoes. There is nothing we can do. The box of pandora has been opened.

The companies have no tools for this, because there is a chance that the company who solves AI will eat the entire cake. And countries cannot do something about it, because clearly it gives an advantage in warfare. When it comes to weapons everything that is possible will be done, which means everybody needs to do it to not be defense less.

There is nothing we can do anymore. We can only hope that LeCun is right and that LLMs are a dead end and that everyone trying to solve AGI with then is essentially wasting money.


Are you filming? - Can't you see the light?

Case closed. People that are very familiar with these glasses need to ask. These devices need to get banned.


Sorry but have you looked at AliExpress lately? You think glasses with hidden video cameras are something we have the ability to ban?

Meta has made the concept popular, but hardware feasibility already tipped the scales, these cameras are going to be ubiquitous and if not in glasses then in even more hidden formats like buttons and pinhole wearables.


So, make it a punishable offence? Maybe get a slap on the wrist the first time and go to jail the second time. That will get people thinking if it's worth it. And it will definitely stop the flood of weirdos that randomly film people to put them on their instatok.

Pretty sure filming people without their consent is already illegal?

I hate these glasses, but why do you need to ban them? Meta operates at scale, so it will only stay in this business if a considerable number of people buy this. Vote with your money. There are legitimate uses for camera glasses (journalism, action sports, etc.).

I'm trying to understand how to "vote with my money" for not being recorded by these glasses in public. My best interpretation would be financially supporting private establishments that have banned these devices... Which feels like exactly what you're arguing against.

How does me not buying these glasses stop creeps from buying them to film people surreptitiously?

the legit uses don't need to be surreptitious.


>Vote with your money

That doesn't work in a society with such extreme wealth inequality.


Not true. Meta’s target demographic aren’t billionaires. They are targeting a wide spectrum of normal people.

> so it will only stay in this business if a considerable number of people buy this. Vote with your money.

How many billions of dollars have been wasted on the Metaverse?


I was surprised, too, and looked it up. WCA officially doesn't differentiate. The human World Record is 3.51 currently held by a Yiheng Wang (male). So there is quite a gap to the new record by Lian Yunzh. But if she continues like that, I think we will find out soon whether there are any biologic reasons for the gap or if it is just because there are many more males into that kind of thing.

There's a big gap between the top 2 solvers (Yiheng Wang and Xuanyi Geng) and everyone right now. Yunzhi Lian is 4th in the world.

> or if it is just because there are many more males into that kind of thing.

Women "trail behind" men in things like speedcubing, e-sports and so on, and I've always felt that it's simply because they've got better things to do with their time.


That feels unnecessary judgemental. If you enjoy a thing, I think that's a great way to spent your time.

> I've always felt that it's simply because they've got better things to do with their time.

Feeling is no substitute for thinking, no matter how much applause this sort of statement will get you from the fairer sex.


Evoltuonarily, males have evolved to be more competitive.

Specially in contest competitions.


Unless somebody steps in and prohibits it they will do it, because somehow that's most cost efficient.

Yeah. It somehow keeps the competitors at bay, apparently, from previous discussions about AI companies who burn books.

Can we really trust these AI companies when they're basically assimilating human art and culture and everything, only to go on and destroy the evidence?


I don't understand why can't they donate the books somewhere. Even if they don't want to share the scans, why not give up the books?

Largely, because books are heavy, and there's limited demand for most used books. If you've ever been at a book sale on the last day, there are always lots of leftover ones that no one wants.

There's a general sense that librarians are preservationists. This is far from the truth. Most books get pulped within a few years of printing. Librarians are constantly discarding books that don't get checked out to make space for new books.


In the name of efficiency they cut the spines, rip the pages apart for easier scanning, books are literal dead wood which would cost a lot in shipping so it's easier and cheaper to just discard or burn the remnants.

The book ceases to be a book right at the beginning of the extractive process.


They can, but it would cost more and take longer, so they don't.

It's not as though they particularly care, and it's not as though bad press matters with a captured regulatory environment.


Can those not be bought?

Interestingly the fake shop is blocked by my nextdns.io setup.

So is Angular dead? Or why doesn't it deserve any mention?

The author mentions Angular in the comments as a personal blind spot

> I've recently found tests written by Fable that don't actually do anything in a very large codebase.

tbf, I've seen these kind of tests as well at $dayjob, written by humans before gpt was a thing. That doesn't invalid your point. But it's still funny that we expect the machine to be perfect, before it can do something for us.


>But it's still funny that we expect the machine to be perfect, before it can do something for us.

We expect machines to be perfect at the things they should be perfect at, and when they aren't perfect we consider that a malfunction and try to make them closer to perfect. A calculator that can't do math correctly every time is a bad calculator. And until LLMs came along computers were just complicated calculators.

Now, however, we build the calculator with an LLM and just accept that it sometimes gets confuzzled and makes numbers up because "humans are no better at math."

It's not funny, it's the way things used to work and it's objectively worse that things can't work that way anymore.


Fully agree. EU needs to get their act together and start getting independent. It's absurd that I cannot pay cashless without using American companies. Or that people lose their bank account because someone in America does something.

Edit: They also need to force banks to make a decision. Do you want to do business in the EU? Then you must not close accounts bank accounts because someone in US puts someone on a list. If that means you lose business in the US, so be it. Make a decision which market you want to operate in. If you want to leave EU, do it. Others will take your place.


> It's absurd that I cannot pay cashless without using American companies

The infrastructure for it exists with instant SEPA transfers, and Wero is slowly developing into a useful system for retail payments, but without the EU mandating that banks and retailers must support it alongside Visa it will take a while for meaningful penetration to happen.


Yeah, it's good that it is progressing. But my hopes are really on the digital Euro. I hope the EU doesn't fall for the lobbying against it by the (Wero) banks.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: