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

Nope. AI safety efforts is part of their attempts at regulatory capture.

If not for China majority of green energy supply wouldnt exist. Neither would near-SotA LLMs with open weights.

I might not like CCP, Xi or whatever they do inside their country, but China is net positive for the world.

Refreshing considering how more and more of western countries are controlled by populists and / or delussional billionare overlords who reject global warming, vaccines, nuclear energy, etc.


if not for China emissions wouldnt have gone past the point of no return.

The majority of those emissions comes from manufacturing products for the Western world.

So what? The goods get made in China because china allows them to be made with no emission/environmental/health and safety regulation.

I think we all know how poor China was in the naughties. They needed foreign investments to enter their country. So now let's think about it: with strict regulations, would have those investors chosen China?

Or do you believe that the Chinese (the people not the government) deserve to live a poor life forever?


China was the 3rd largest economy in the world. Their middle class was fine. If they wanted to add some environmental regulation it wouldnt have halted growth.

It is pointless to say "3rd largest" without mentioning the per capita data.

Comulative CO2 emissions tell a different story.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-co-emissions


emissions pre 1950 and post 2000 are weighted completely different. Emissions post 2014 climate agreement are weighed even heavier.

What does "weighted" mean in "emissions pre 1950 and post 2000 are weighted completely different"?

The chart you're responding to has no weighting, 1 tonne of CO2 produced is 1 tonne of CO2 produced regardless of when.


Weighted means we should consider them differently. 1 tonne of CO2 produced when you have no idea what global warming is hits very different to 1 tonne of CO2 produced when you've known about global warming for 60 years and the entire world has come together and said lets start trying to reduce emissions.

If at that point you start slapping down 60 coal plants and moon shotting your co2 pollution then you should be blamed for global warming.


So whoever industrialises before there's scientific consensus on climate change gets to keep the benefits of their pollution and those who don't have to somehow skip that part of the tech tree and jump straight to renewables/nuclear?

I can see why the countries that were not first to industrialise are not on board with that idea.


Would not have done so yet you mean.

The other biggest emitter is still barely decreasing its emissions, far less halting. A slight decrease in the rate per year does not save us from the point of no return.


You can look at the emissions growth of all the major emitters around 15 years ago and they're all slowing their growth and tapering off.. except china which is doing a hockey stick curve rushing to get as many coal plants down as they can.

Slowing the growth from a high level just means accelerating towards the point of no return, but moderating the acceleration.

It doesn't mean stopping before the point of no return. It means continuing towards the point of no return, and going faster, but not increasing the speed as much as before.

Blaming China here is disingenious.


yeah the solution was to ask the poorest countries in the world to give up and remain poor

At the time when china should have begun reducing emissions 2014 they were one of the biggest economies in the world.

Nobody care if Chinese models are only 99%, 95% or 90% as good as SotA US models.

Because we only have weights and able to self-host Chinese ones. Gemma 4 and GPT OSS are nice to have, but nowhere close to that.


Come on. It's not WikiLeaks. If they were targeted by FBI it would be down.

What do you mean, I didnt make it up... Its detailed on the archive.today wikipedia page.

The media barrons in the west have bribed the US government to pursue archive criminally on their behalf for helping people bypass paywalls.

https://www.theverge.com/news/815691/fbi-subpoena-archive-is...


That's great, how does that absolve the archive.today maintainer's bad faith activities, including creating a country-wall?

Because if he's being targeted by the feds, he obviously he doesn't want his private information being published by some guy who self-admittedly did it on a whim?

Is this really that hard to understand?


Umm, every USA company blocks North Korea, Iran and often Cuba.

One guy blocking a single country is not at all problematic.


  Location: South East Asia
  Remote: Yes
  Willing to relocate: Yes
  Technologies: Java, Spring, PHP, Laravel, C++, Godot, Unity, C#, Linux, Git
  Email: hire@arseniyshestakov.com
  Linkedin: https://linkedin.com/in/arseniyshestakov
I’m a software engineer and game developer with 15+ years of experience. My background ranges from full-stack web development and data scraping to building custom OpenWRT firmwares and maintaining C++ open-source project using CMake, Valgrind.

For the past five years, I co-founded and ran an indie game studio. As gamedev CTO, I led a small team of devs, designers, and artists to ship three publisher-funded commercial games, including a simultaneous PC and multi-console (PS, Xbox, Switch) release. Most recently, I've explored integrating LLMs into my workflow, allowing me to single-handedly build two complex 50,000+ LOC client-server multiplayer prototypes in just six months.

I am very extroverted person with experience of managing a company P&L, crafting pitch decks, or driving bizdev. I know how to hire, lead, and execute fast.

I am looking for both full-time roles or contract work, in or out of gamedev. I treat my work as my life, and will dedicate 200% of my energy to it. So if you looking for contractor, co-founder or just advice on indie gamedev feel free to reach me!


> The apple computer owner will probably be running local models that are better than today’s frontier on the same hardware.

Hardware is not magically getting more memory or bandwidth.

Believing there will be some magical optimizations to compensate for it is just dellusion.


Open weight models have been getting better/smaller every year.

Also, from what I can tell, MLX inference is not as well optimized as CUDA, and the M5 Ultra has additional kinds of AI compute which is unavailable on other M models. With the massive 1.2 TB/s 512GB Mac studios coming out, I think MLX will get a lot more attention.

In short: Todays models should run faster next year, and next year's models should also be more efficient.


Then explain how equal parameter size models can grow in capability every few months or year?

> Firefox took a long time to catch up and their CEO was utterly incompetent, which seriously harmed Mozilla.

This is basically whole history of Mozilla and to be honest most of open source projects that dont have BDFL type of leadership.


It is especially true for projects like Firefox which have access to massive funding since these attract the sort of people who consider those funds 'wasted' because they can be used to do so much for 'the common good'. Mitchell Baker - the utterly incompetent CEO - considered Firefox an afterthought because what the world needed was more NGO activism and what she needed was 400% more money for herself [1].

Wikipedia/Wikimedia is another example of a project with massive funding with similar problems even though the latter has a (not so) BDFL.

[1] https://calpaterson.com/mozilla.html


Wikimedia might be not perfect, but Wikipedia is still one of the most visited websites in the world and source of a lot of humanity knowledge in general.

Firefox on other hand is just something only nerds like us care about and only alive because Alphabet / Google is scared of antitrust legal action possibility.


And wikipedia runs off a tiny tiny fraction of what they raise. Almost all of the good on wikipedia comes in-spite of the organisation that owns it. Without the community pouring hundreds of thousands of hours into the project (unpaid) a year, wikipedia would be dead immediately. And if there was ever a time in its life that the project needed good leadership and innovative thinking, it would be now when AI is seriously threatening its survival. If people stop going to the site and instead go to the chat bots that scrape the site, there will be less and less incentive for the power users to continue maintaining wikipedia.

Iceland is one of few countries that can actually afford to have no military. They live on an island. Closest landmass to them is Greenland that's certainly not plotting to annex them and its 300km away.

There's no natutal resources, no anything other than fish and 400,000 human population.


They have a strategic location in the north Atlantic, if the US did not have defacto military control of iceland several other countries have historically been interested in annexing them (germany under WW2, soviet union after that). They also only got their independence from Denmark after WW2.

And yet they've done fine for 1000+ years.

Moreover, this whole narrative of defense is so childlish and asinine, generally spread by people of countries that are always on the attacking side like Americans.

It reminds me of the elementary kids in a local school that started to bring knifes to school because others had knifes too.


You have a country where there is people still alive who remembers their country getting independence, don’t you think that independence matters to them?

I think over the past year or so the calculus has changed dramatically. There was credible threat by the US of invasion of another NATO member in the same neighborhood. It's intellectually dishonest to say things are the same as in the 90s, when the US was defending the sovereignty of these places.

> And yet they've done fine for 1000+ years.

They got their independence after WW2, they have been either annexed or colonized by other powers since 1262.


Fun part is that US legislative branch did not have much say in creation of DMCA.

US executive branch back then was just lobbied by major copyright holders and they literally bypassed much of legislation process around congress by creating and signing international agreements instead.

By the time DMCA landed in congress there was very little that could be changed because US already had to honour intetnational agreements it's already created and signed.

Louis Rossman have a video on it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0-j89LJysY


Didn't the international agreements require ratification from legislative?

Yes, but as told by DMCA creator quoted in video congress cant amend them much unlike any other law.

Congress could obviously not pass ratificarion, but you know how its usually going.


Yes, treaties are effectively a backdoor around the already imbalanced democratic process.

I agree so much on this.

Let's say I'm caucasian male grown up in poor ex-USSR shithole struggling through immigration, changing countries and losing social circle multiple times along the way and struggling with loneliness, etc.

Then the least I want to do is to play game as migrant from Eastern Europe. Because if the character and their story is accurate and representive then I just be bored from it. And if it's inaccurate then it's just bad story telling.


Hey SSX, its your cousin Niko, let’s go bowling.


Instantly removed potential 0.05% of players


Yeah, but if you do game with characters "representing" your actual audience you'll lose way more people.

A lot of gamers play games because they let them experience something they dont have in their real life. Not to roleplay their real self.


I The Office, Dwight made a version of himself in Second Life that was the same as his real life. The whole idea that someone would want to experience their actual life in game form was the joke.

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

Search: