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

> write an English paragraph that doesn't make me want to claw my eyes out.

LLMs are very much capable of that. Your belief in the opposite has two causes. Firstly the toupee fallacy. You don't notice LLM written text that doesn't make you claw your eyes out. Second is defaults. The huge majority of people who writes text with LLMs just uses default Claude/GPT models, and put near zero effort in making it sound human. Those models are indeed bad at it by default so they need a lot of effort to overcome it. In cases like Opus 5 it's near impossible to overcome. That doesn't generalize to "LLMs".


Right, I assume tomorrow you'll be applying for the next Nazi camp guard vacancy? After all, if you don't do it, someone with less scruples likely will.

Today we see the Nazis as bad. Do you think they saw themselves as such? They had an ideal, and they worked towards it. And I'd say they're were many who didn't care about that ideal and just wanted a job. You can't compare the morals of today with yesterday, or judge the ideals of a person or group without relevant context.

> most scientists working on this really want to see and experience it.

We used to call these people doomsday cultists and made sure to ostracize them from society.


If I don't get accepted into art school, I might as well exterminate a few ethnicities.

Actually, yours seems worse. Bringing about "the end of all professions" sounds like you're talking about ending humanity.


Explain why? How does live being worth living binarily depend on having a cushy software job?

I've seen how people work in manual labor type jobs (all that will be left, right?). They're worked to the bone and paid peanuts. It's a wretched existence for someone soft like me.

> You can't just commit crimes on the open internet without really hiding IPs and what not, and expect that to not come back to haunt you eventually.

Not sure what you're talking about, the current AI boom is entirely based on committing crimes on the open internet without really hiding IPs and what not.

So is much of big tech in general.


Keyword being "you". "They" can commit crimes, because they're big tech companies who give gifts to the right people. But "you" are not "they".

A good majority of the Americans want Epstein's best buddies' jailed, instead the POTUS is one.

> by saying things like terrorism is in the eye of the beholder

This is so trivially true that it's not worth bringing up in discussoon with anyone who can be taken seriously. It's true for any politically charged word, and terrorism is one of the most political words in the English language.


> Seems like the best way around this is... don't do business with terrorists?

Do you do any business with the US government? Potentially even supporting them financially through taxes? Why are you doing business with terrorists?


In EU countries with independent court systems, those EU governments routinely ignore court decisions they don't like. I did a very deep dive into this. There is no European country where checks and balances consistently, properly work.

Surprisingly enough among EU countries, Austria gets relatively close to adherence. Canada is likely the best at it globally (and yes, that takes into account "notwithstanding").


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

Search: