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

This falls apart completely if you’re like me and only see the list presented on brutalist.report which is strictly chronological and with zero algorithms.

How does that differ from turning on showdead and going to /newest ?

Looks algorithmic to me. Reverse-chronological with upvote threshold(?), where upvotes are correlated with sort rank on vanilla HN.

Again, not a thing if you are on the site I mentioned.

There’s clearly decision-making going on because it’s not listing most HN posts. How is it deciding what not to show?

Not to mention HN posts don’t spontaneously emerge out of the randomness of the cosmos.

Sure they do. Just with extra steps.

Remember that thing Carl Sagan told us: “if you want to complain about AI from scratch you must first invent the universe.”


Saying it a second time doesn't make it any more true.

If there's a vote threshold, it's still profoundly influenced by the HN algorithm, because front page exposure is the principal component in how many votes a story gets.

Indeed, if you go out of your way to circumvent automatic story ranking, the particularities of automatic story ranking no longer affect you...

A capability available without visiting any third party sites, by the way: https://news.ycombinator.com/newest

I just hope you don't believe that somehow this magically allows you to escape bias. A (reverse) chronological sort is still a sort.


That site's interesting, but it would be super helpful with some summaries of the stories and maybe of the comments. Though I imagine that would make it a LOT more expensive to host.

Seems like you used AI to steal the results from the same experiment done a decade ago to be honest. Heard this story in a YouTube video long ago.

This isn’t new. The disgraced Lunduke did this same test nearly a decade ago and observed the same results. Android is malware disguised as a consumer operating system.

It's a dupe and was a story last week.

I know for a fact we have at least 30-50 live weather cameras in my area (Windy.com shows em) and this site shows absolutely none of them.

Gotta work on your discovery more.


Are they YouTube streams? The LiveWorld site is only YouTube streams.

yeah exactly this. and the 160-cam offer still stands whenever youre ready, hari at sapporosoft dot com works.

Will send. I did a compare and I think about 120 you didn't have.

It wasn't written by a person, so it's invalid.

There aren't small problems in these posters though. They're huge, obvious, and an indicator that the one who made the flyer didn't care whatsoever.

When it includes an American Flag with more than 50 stars + the bottom row is cut off, you know they didn't even bother to proofread it.

This is the kind of garbage we're suffering with.


Those are, comparatively, small problems for the medium of a poster.

You have to understand that 99% of people who will see the poster will view it for <5 seconds. They wont sit there and count the stars.

And, of the people who do examine the poster closely, they’re looking at the text. They want to see the date, time, event details. The background is background.


But what is the point of the background then? I mean, it seems like we're admitting that the design doesn't matter, then why keep up the ruse? Let's drop design, and keep just plain textual information. There is no substance to it, it's just performative, a simulacrum of design.

You should try typing "American flag clipart" into Google and see non-AI images with the wrong number of stars.

Aren’t those ai generated too?

Why you making me check for you?

The first one I clicked on is at a stock photo site that says:

Every visual at iStock is crafted through human expertise, creativity, and ingenuity. We do not allow AI-generated visuals in our library.


Are you aware we don’t all get the same results from a google image search? Or do you seriously believe if I search the same keywords we will be looking at the exact same images?

That's not what I said. I said the first one I saw was not AI art via simple inspection. I wondered if you even looked.

Did you even look?


These are small problems. Details, even. You can be quite successful and get all that stuff wrong. Not that I'd recommend it.

https://www.theverge.com/gadgets/931347/trump-mobile-t1-phon...


Step 1: develop a cult of personality, to the point of becoming president 2 (even after openly failing to coup a lost election)

Step 2-3: sell anything to your cult followers, doesn’t matter how good or bad it is

Step 4: profit

Simple recipe for success


Not every poster has that issue as you can see from the posting. It is a simple matter of caring enough to look at the output in more detail. These are issues that can be overcome.

Sure, but the basic value proposition of AI is that you don't have to care. These issues could be overcome, but they aren't, because the whole way the technology is promoted and sold guides the user away from caring.

Disagree. The value proposition of AI is that you can focus your caring on the things that matter, and let the machine do the dirty work.

One of the things that keeps circling in my mind when it comes to LLMs and similar transformer architectures is they are technically very impressive, and some of the things they can do are amazing, but there seems to be a compulsive need by the executives of corporations producing them to lie about their capabilities.

I suspect that what drives the compulsive lying and exaggeration is that they know what LLMs can actually do is not worth the development and operating costs (at least for now), so, like Bernie Madoff, they pretend that they're more capable than they are in the hopes that the next round of investment will somehow bridge the gap and let them actually produce what they've been falsely promising their investors they can do, and make the whole thing worthwhile.


This is the important part. Right now, AI is a tool. You can use it to generate high quality output, or you can use it to generate slop. If the output is slop, that is a reflection of the person using the tool, not AI.

I get AI slop from employees sometimes. If they provide poor quality work that hasn't been proofread, that is an employee problem, not an AI problem.


You know the saying where a million dollar company failing is "their" problem, but a billion dollar company failing is "our" problem?

We're going to quickly approach that problem in the conning years at this current rate, like the obesity epidemic. At some point you can't just dismiss things as personal responsibility when a significant portion of society suffers from it and need to instead look at the underlying systematic issues empowering bad incentives.

Of course, the US is awful at the latter. So I'm not holding my breath.


True. But an organizer who doesn't care, will also not be willing to pay for good artwork. AI haters should put money where their mouths are and fund human top artwork.

Posters for small events, a well known space where you will find „top artwork“… you really just need to spend 1h in Inkscape to get something decent

You're really overestimating how many people can draw something "decent" in Inkscape. Most likely they will take a template. That's not necessarily better than AI either.

A template is perfectly fine to use

I don't claim to be an artist and a template is still done with the caring eye of a professional. It's way better than an AI generated poster. Or at the very least, there's many less instances where I've seen overly used templates than I have badly designed AI generated designs.

A lot of people here are AI brained, unfortunately.

This is embarrassing. These companies need to stop these obviously coordinated stunts.

The embarrassing part is that it might be working.

I was at my in laws… these people have a landline they can’t imagine getting rid of, an emergency only cell flip phone, don’t own a microwave…

And they’re asking me if I heard about “OpenAI’s rouge agents hacking huggingface”.

This is not a joke. They said huggingface. I was surrounded by four walls in which I never would have bet someone else’s money that I’d ever hear the two words put together in that order.

It’s a formalized propaganda campaign. Watch, it’s about to split on hard political lines too, Obama is out there with a suspiciously “for the children” AI regulation push for midterms.


Supporting fascists by 50% is pretty damn alarming to me.

That would be terrible! However I don’t see evidence of that in the article.

The fact that the PAC donated to Pramila Jayapal shows that clearly supporting fascism isn't the point of the donations. But I would absolutely say that each of Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and Lindsey Graham are (were in the Graham's case) fascistic in their positions. All of them support(ed) Trump, who readily accepted a description of "fascist" from Mamdani, on camera (if his status as such weren't already self-evident).

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

Search: