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

clarification: your credit card or company’s card now has $78,000 of charges on it?

Yes the money have already been billed to my credit accounts

Who has a $78k limit on their credit card that allows online AI payments?

You have access to this kind of money and have no idea how to set safeguards on your AI harnesses?

Did you just walk in off the street or something? To wherever you're working?

Where do you work, anyways?


Actually this was a company CC with a limit is 50 K \ month, which is kind of normal to run the server for an AI company, and the money were taken across 20 days inJuly and August. By the way I am the CTO of the company in question which is Eternal Tech (see detwin.ai)

maybe a `s/et/ar/` is in order for the company name? /s

Well shit! That’s awful, I hope the hn post gets you support where emailing didn’t

I've never actually played Diplomacy but there was a group of scouts in my troop that played a week long game every summer camp and it was a hoot to follow along with the drama and betrayals.

That’s one of the ideas of LVT actually: building apartments in land doesn’t increase tax burden, burning the apartments doesn’t lower it

I actually think there's a lot of positives in land value taxes. However, I was objecting to the phrase "The land value tax can’t be dodged by leaving nor can it be passed on to renters" because that is missing key issues.

Land's assessed value is based on what you could do with it. If can be rented at a profit, that's something you can do with it, and its potential matters. If it can't, then that is no longer a potential value of it.

That doesn't make lvt a bad idea, it's just that I think there's not enough acknowledgement of the trade-offs and limitations.


Burning down an apartment building doesn't change what could be done with the lot; an appropriate valuation method for LVT would not give a different valuation for the land depending on what is built on it.

> Burning down an apartment building doesn't change what could be done with the lot; an appropriate valuation method for LVT would not give a different valuation for the land depending on what is built on it.

True, but an LVT is a cost. Changes in cost can change what is financially viable to do with a property, regardless of what is currently done with the lot, and thus can impact the land value.


Actually no, land value tax is not a marginal cost so does not change the profit maximizing use of land.

The idea of cost-plus pricing is folk economics.

Tax incidence is very well understood in economics and has to do with relative supply and demand elasticity (supply of land is perfectly inelastic) and marginal costs which land value tax does not touch.

It's accurate to say LVT changes the price of land. But it doesn't change the profit maximizing productive use of land.

Other taxes that scale with production (sales tax, income tax, property tax) do change profit maximizing productive use.


And crucially, “rent it for 10 bucks” and “rent it for 20 bucks” are different uses such that the LVT can’t change which is optimal

I buy this as a defense for the first couple hacks but at the point that the last six times they hit enter it hacked some random website and they hit enter a seventh time?

'I', presumably

Yeah, thought that was pretty obvious, alongside the “AI-friendly” flatpark. Guess I’ll be more explicit next time…

narrowly scoped laws limit the blast radius of a stupid law without the political price of opposing a law in the aftermath of a disaster that law would have prevented. imagine if they had banned commodities trading in general!

When maliciously convincing a person of a point, a huge fraction of the effort in every sentence goes into convincing the mark to listen to the next sentence. Individuals certainly can walk away at any point, but populations do and don't respond to tricks in this direction, and any engagement tricks that work generalize to any point of contention. Lots of avenues to this, from scientology's fortune telling to timeshare's trapped presentations. RL on engagement was the first billion dollar use of deep reinforcement learning!

Would you like to hear more examples of humans using these techniques?


Not really, but point taken :-)

I'd be more interested in reading about the techniques that the chatbots were using in this study, to see if they are descending into dark patterns or not.


Growing up, actual peak existence was visiting Grandma's house and playing with my mom's old toys. The seemingly unlimited, completely novel hoard from another time. My son feels similarly about visiting my parents' house and playing with my old toys. This may or may not be sustainable but it seems like it is well on its way with four generations involved- from where I stand, keeping a good pile of consumerism around to pay it forward in 20 years doesn't seem out of proportion with the joy I've received. It's definitely a culture thing- nobody in my family tree seems to move much, and has decent taste in throwing out the actual trash and keeping stuff stored nicely over the long time gaps, then not being fussy about the next generation being pretty hard on stuff (within reason, as appropriate for their age)

No proof verifier verifies all valid proofs and terminates on all invalid proofs.

(actually I am wrong. You would introduce a new proof, and then step the verifier on all ongoing proofs, so non-termination isn't a driving concern)


Pretty well everyone who still posts on X is deep fried, smart or dumb. Some of them can tell but can't stop (Nate silver, one of the greens, Zvi) and some seem unaware.

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

Search: