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

> log-in with X

No thanks? Also why do you even need a login?


it doesn't appear to be a requirement.

yeah, it's purely optional. by default, your results stay private in your browser session

but i wanted a way for people to publish their results to share w/ others


That's a reasonable explanation. IF you put it on the site there will be fewer complaints.

good call; will update the sign-in to be less prominent and a disclaimer. appreciate the feedback

GitHub Copilot is an incredibly limited tool compared to any real harness, and I'm so tired about all of these studies that claim a lack of efficiency while at the same time doing everything in their power to shoot themselves in the foot.

Also, it's insane to me that this whole article has been written without specifying anywhere the models being used.

Like, of course you're not gonna be productive if all you have is Sonnet 4.6???


I think you’re missing that it’s not only about coding. That’s just one aspect of the work.

Claude Cowork is also a better harness than GitHub Copilot. Many such cases. I never mentioned coding being the only goal.

Considering the timeline, it would have been Sonnet 3.5

Roughly 5-10$ for 10h, assuming you few-shot it.

Price per hour:

- 3.8 Flash TTS, standard: $0.81

- 3.8 Flash TTS, batch: $0.41

- 3.8 Flash‑Lite TTS, standard: $0.54

- 3.8 Flash‑Lite TTS, batch: $0.27


That is the biggest difference here for me. I have not looked at every solution, but many. They are either much more expensive or garbage quality. For example my next target audiobook is a monster 250k words, 1.5m characters, so about $15 here or $75 using elevenlabs (0.05 per 1k characters). For me that is the difference between I will or I won't use it.

Until the end of the year, then double that. And that's only the audi output though the text input shouldn't cost much in comparison.

Official pricing can be seen here: https://ai.google.dev/gemini-api/docs/pricing#gemini-3.8-fla...


I'm sure this was already easily doable for years by using plain and boring computer vision

It was easily doable for even more years using plain and boring MK1 eyeballs and a stopwatch.

If you are spending millions on ads, you can pay a couple of guys to watch TV and take notes.


Broadcasters also keep logs of their broadcasts for verification purposes. The traffic systems that inject the ads have parameters for how often and what times certain ads are played which are quite deterministic.

For the World Cup, this was always easy.

It was not easy for your local triple A baseball game being streamed to 500 viewers. This approach scales down.


Hours of bleeding-edge CV analysis sounds pretty expensive for a triple-A game streamed to 500 pairs of eyeballs. They’ll be using the pen & paper approach, too.

Not at scale - a thousand games automatically scored: easy, just feed in the new video files. A thousand workers for individual matches across the country and different channels: absolutely not.

Not to mention human accuracy will likely be way, way worse, no human being will maintain their attention counting ads at five second intervals for even ten minutes, almost two hours is unthinkable.


If attention is all you have, humans are pretty bad at it for long boring tasks.

Since people have bought air time on a broadcast, people have done this very thing to ensure their ad ran. They also notice other analytics like what other ads ran around it and what the content of the program was when it ran. Can't run an ad selling a new car when the scene just before the break was a brutal car wreck or something.

Eventually, people buying ad time on TV stations could request an air check and receive a VHS tape showing a bit of the programming before/after the ad pod your ad ran. Particularly useful when buying ad time on local stations out of the market where you lived.


I remember google bought a company that recorded local FM broadcasts around the country to independently verify ad plays.

I worked for a company in 2020 that did ad analysis with computer vision - specifically in sports, quantifying value for sponsors based on exposure on team socials (accounting for logo size, positioning, etc in photos + videos) - I was a humble annotator https://www.blinkfire.com

Plain and boring computer vision would have still required a team who would identify frames to sample before processing, and then annotate, generalize and classify the data.

Not an expert on this but I don't think same kind of manual effort is required anymore.


It was never required because you already had the frames labeled. Because you gave the ad footage to the station. You created the ad, you already have a golden copy, you just need to verify N sequential frames match to within X percent of pixels.

> by using plain and boring computer vision

Technology is funny, I remember when an intern project detected cats in Youtube videos and it was front page news (round here, at least).

Now it's just boring technology.


>"You're flying! You're sitting in a chair, in the sky!" --PP toucher CK.

This goes along well with another saying I have.

"You will never prove machines are intelligent, you will only prove humans are not"


You probably don't even need vision. The audio on adverts is noticeably different.

There's no audio on the adverts in question.

> The analysis counted advertising built into the match footage (e.g. on the hoardings), rather than commercials shown during advertising breaks


While I agree that fandom is shit - the link you shared doesn't contain any mentions about int overflow

It's buried at the bottom of Boss Battle Strategy:

"Since the Dream Devourer has 32000 HP, which is close to the signed 16-bit integer limit, it is actually possible to defeat it by healing it. By using powerful magic that it absorbs during its second phase, it can be (temporarily) healed past 32767 HP, which overflows the counter and makes its HP go negative."


There is a certain hilarious irony in killing the big boss with love

That part is not on breezewiki.com, is it?

It is on breezewiki. Right above the gallery section.

Ohhh. I just saw the ChronoWiki banner and clicked on it thinking it was a redirect. My bad!

It seems to display the same content that it does on Fandom for me. What page are you seeing?

I made the same mistake as the other person. When I click the breezewiki link I get a full screen banner (on mobile) that directs me to a wiki page with different information.

I didn’t realize there was content underneath the banner on the first page


Who are these "they" you're talking about?

If your answer is EA or rats then a simple Google search will just show you that it's not true?


I'm yet to see evidence they are weighing global warming they way it IMO should be weighted relatively to eg AI risk. I get it, it's not cool.

Compare the number of posts of some EA-adjacent public people talking about AI and talking about this. Or what measure should we choose?


Label them what you want. I'll go with EAs if you insist.

Sure, they're not entirely monolithic. There's room for "EA, but vegan", "EA, but global warming still matters", maybe even "EA, but vaguely socialist". As I keep saying, the core belief is that they're special because of their intellectual superiority, anything else is negotiable.


No, what you said what that "They also downplay global warming, nuclear war, wealth inequality" which is just a flat out lie

Not all of them downplay all of these, but yeah, most of them do. They may have one or two areas of dissent (for EA as a self-identity-building project, do you see why that is to be expected?), but there is a core of beliefs. Yudkowsky's. And he's downplayed all of these.

This sounds incredibly judgemental and imposing of your own world view and moral compass

what is so "incredibly" and "imposing" in the parent comment, that saying «my experience is…», «i feel more in it than many imagine/expect», «factually ruins many lifes», and «it just seem working this way», even «remove the judgment element» ??

it is as gently and friendly of a warning as it could be.

i would say rather less nicely: people! don't be degenerate! it does not worth it. it causes harm to you, to neighbours, to bystanders too, even if you dont intend.


Well OP claiming they get "bothered, upset and irritated" by people having "rape kinks" and "pitying them" sounds kind of judgemental to me. Same goes with "don't be degenerate" for sexual behaviours you do not approve that, somehow, also harm one's neighbours for some reason.

Something being judgemental is not a reason to dismiss it.

Imo judgemental as in starting from "my life experience" and getting to that's "how to live" is a reason to dismiss it as an argument, as others may have different life experiences and yours is not universal.

It is when there’s no concrete reasoning behind it. The reasoning provided here is “well I don’t like it, therefore it must be bad!”

That kind of thinking would be acceptable if we were like… 8 years old. But as an adult, having that reasoning process is embarrassing.


How having lot of sex would cause harm to my neighbours?

They might get sad because they feel like they're missing out

Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be having a good time.

I'm sure OP would argue that the breakdown of the family structure and social cohesion has a deleterious effect on society as a whole, which includes your neighbors.

It's really a hard time for freedoms, huh?

>There's a proper and healthy way to live.

dude straight up said other people are Doing Life Wrong


90% of this is just driven by strong emotional reactions from someone that feels uncomfortable about people being open about their non-standard sexual life, in the same way that many people have weird negative reactions about polyamorous relationships in general.

The remaining 10% is just the author trying to sprinkle in cult-like insinuations to justify his contempt.

Regularly meeting with people that have shared interests and ideas is not a cult.

Finding some of those people attractive and having sex with them is not a cult.

But somehow the fact that the romantic/sexual relationships are not traditionally monogamous makes it a cult?


The emotional reaction comes from a deep-seated evolutionary survival mechanism that has served mankind well to present day. Uggo fuck club tells you EVERYTHING you need to know about these people, and more importantly, their thoughts & perceptions. If you join uggo fuck club, your perceptions are off. Why should I value this guy's perceptions & prescriptions relating to ML when he can't even swing the right ones over his own BMI?

Are you implying that every rationalist that preaches AI doomerism gets invited to orgies?

Isn't one of them going around offering people "reverse gangbangs" to resign from Anthropic?

No, he is saying that if they stop preaching it, they stop being invited. A -> B does not imply B -> A.

So even those who were never invited are afraid that they won't get invited anymore?

No, just the ones that are part of this specific community described in the blog post.

"Mostly" in the title implies otherwise.

The title is senstaionalist. The actual content of the article refers to a specific community, including Eliezer Yudkowsky, Aella, and others.

> but if you want to stop a boulder rolling down hill, what can you do besides run ahead of it and try stop it?

Maybe the first thing to do is to stop making the boulder bigger?


Gavin: I don't want to live in a world where anyone makes a bigger boulder than Hooli does.

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

Search: