I do not recommend using the word “AI” as if it refers to a single thing that encompasses all possible systems incorporating AI techniques. LLM guys don’t distinguish between things that could actually be built and “throwing an LLM at the problem” – you’re treating their lack-of-differentiation as valid and feeding them hype.

I’M A BAT

I’M GAY

I mean, if no one’s getting paid, then my preferred price is $0, to everyone in the world.

You’re right! There’s a disclosure on the page but it’s fuckin tiny.

• high willingness to accept painfully inexact responses
• high tendency to side with authority when given no information
• low ability to distinguish “how it is” from “how it seems like it should be”

Meta:

• default expectation that others are the same way
• indignant consent-ignoring gesture if they’re not

Oh, OK. I think all the VC-adjacent people still really believe in crypto, if it helps. They probably also don’t believe in it, depending on the room. I think it will come back.

Put me down for “doesn’t think it will end.” Did crypto end?

It’s the technique of running a primary search against some other system, then feeding an LLM the top ~25 or so documents and asking it for the specific answer.

A friend who worked with her is sympathetic to her but does not endorse her: this is a tendency she has, she veers back and forth on it a lot, she has frequent moments of insight where she disavows her previous actions but then just kind of continues doing them. It’s Kanye-type behavior.

The media again builds a virtual public consisting of billionaires of a variety of positions and ask you “which one do you agree with?” This is a strategy to push the public closer to the beliefs of billionaires.

I don’t know who these fucking people are. The real public in California still supports Biden by a 25% margin.

I don’t understand why people take him at face value when he claims he’s always been a Democrat up until now. He’s historically made large contributions to candidates from both parties, but generally more Republicans than Democrats, and also Republican PACs like Protect American Jobs. Here is his personal record.

Since 2023, he picked up and donated ~$20,000,000 to Fairshake, a crypto PAC which predominantly funds candidates running against Democrats.

Has he moved right? Sure. Was he ever left? No, this is the voting record of someone who wants to buy power from candidates belonging to both parties. If it implies anything, it implies he currently finds Republicans to be corruptible.

Stuck in my brain: I used to work at a dating site for Indian people, and one of the things we tried was “LLM-generated pickup lines.”

I don’t remember most of them and we never made the feature public, but one of them sticks out in my mind for being the most incomprehensible.

Guy-to-girl:

What’s your remedy for a Bollywood love affair?

This is another one for the “throw an AI model at the problem with no concrete plans for how to evaluate its performance” category.

Please share!!!

It sounds like ChatGPT is eligible for a degree in business!

If it helps, I know who you are and will still happily tell you incorrect information about yourself and your profession if asked to!

Show HN: I’m 16 and building an AI based startup called Factful with friends

In which the Orange Site is a very bad influence on some minors:

How do you evaluate “factuality” without knowing all the facts, though? That’s the downfall of all such services - eventually (or even immediately) they begin to just push their preferred agenda because it’s easier and more profitable.

Hi there, thank you for your feedback! I think we could potentially go down the route of a web3 approach where we get the public consensus on the facts.

…

Your first meta-problem to solve is to get people to care about the facts, and to accept them when they’re wrong. There is an astonishing gap between knowing the truth and acting accordingly.

Yea, that’s why we also added in an grammar checker, even if they dont care about facts, they can get something better than gram marly that checks for way more for way less.

Holy fuck! That man does not sound like an engineer. Why is he the CTO of anything?

My opinion is that Jesse Lyu is lying about making any significant changes. (Because otherwise the demo wouldn’t have worked)

I don’t want bad things for him personally, but I want bad things to happen to people who lie in public.

The code is open source with licensing requirements, so I’m therefore hoping someone Jesse has already made a statement to can write him with these requests:

• For GPL2 licensed components such as Linux: Give me your changes in source form.
• For Apache-licensed components such as Android: What files did you change?

I can imagine him responding in three ways:

• “Sure, here is another lie” – and then he’s locked into an answer which will probably make him look clueless as hell
• “We don’t think we have to do that” – and now the Open Source Reply Guy Brigade instantly hates him.
• <no reply> – and now, given that a conversation has actually occurred, he looks evasive.

I read a few of the guy’s other blog posts and they follow a general theme:

• He’s pretty resourceful! Surprisingly often, when he’s feeling comfortable, he resorts to sensible troubleshooting steps.
• Despite that, when confronted with code, it seems like he often just kind of guesses at what things mean without verifying it.
• When he’s decided he doesn’t understand a thing, he WILL NOT DIG INTO THE THING.

He seems totally hireable as a junior, but he absolutely needs the adult supervision.

The LLM Revolution seems really really bad for this guy specifically – it promises that he can keep working in this ineffective way without changing anything.