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

It’s an excellent article marred by the last line/ heading.

People do things.

Good or bad is relative to their own biases/experiences/ beliefs and moral compass.

Very few people are truly sociopaths who do evil stuff for personal gain.

Most do it because of the curse of the “banality of evil” (re: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eichmann_in_Jerusalem?wprov=sf...>)

Doesn’t make it right, but like everything else in life the reality is much more complex than saying “good people refuse to do bad things”


The last line/heading of this article makes its main point super clear. Don't deceive yourself (and others).

I’m well aware tech companies are evil and yet work at one.

My current read is that ~20-30% of people in America actively delight in hurting others (ICE supporters etc)

Another 30% do not seem to care about anything but their own well-being. (I don’t like to think I fall here but as a big tech peon it doesn’t look good).

The remaining percent seem to care and are trying their best but looking at how things are going it’s not enough


The former is a recognised personality trait called "social dominance orientation".


I can see using this to index the thousands of bookmarks I have and my every growing reading list and see if my local model and find a pattern and/or help surface anything interesting related to the papers I read



went through the whole phase of asd-ste100 -> caveman -> wait-what -> “remove mannered prose” And a few others.. Now I just use a vale lint script I made using what worked from the skills and lint the output (docs and scripts) and just ask it to write in plain technical English for its chat messages with full context. Skills just make the entire process bloated beyond belief (apart from the needless context rot and token usage)


I went through the whole phase of

asd-ste100 -> caveman -> wait-what

And a few others..

Now I just use a vale lint script I made using what worked from the skills and lint the output (docs and scripts) and just ask it to write in plain technical English for its chat messages with full context.

Skills just make the entire process bloated beyond belief (apart from the needless context rot and token usage)


People here do not seem to be considering the second-order effects of these series of events. No academic institution or enterprise will trust OpenAI, Anthropic or any other non-local AI model with their core IP. There will be severe restrictions on what employees at these companies/institutions can share with AI services even from their personal accounts. (Or I am just overthinking it)


Many academics and grad students I know have closed source their in progress work, and started being really careful about what they chat with LLMs (or using local ones) because of the drama around this. No one wants four years of their life getting sniped by ten million dollars worth of tokens.


Or, if you're using, you need to push a pre-print relatively soon after AI help.

ZDR is a thing. extremely large companies with a lot of IP rights use GPT/Claude without issues.

It's competition after all. If your academic colleague doesn't care and is leveraging ChatGPT in a big way and is making progress, you'll start to feel the pressure.


i dont trust academics to not be dumb idiots. hes working with ant but using gpt. and then he cries foul? i cry dumb first


This is definitely true. So i can now justify my recent gpu purchase


If so that's an extremely good thing

You are just overthinking it. This place is now a Claude blog and anti OpenAI site.


I hold both camps equally in low regard. Depending on the time of day this blog is hyper focused on either one of the companies and can do no wrong. All LLM companies and associated entities have a track record of fudging the truth to their needs and following big money without actual concern for the wider world. Whether this is out of directed act or misplaced idealism is up for debate.


My response was not targeted towards Open-AI but towards all closed-source AI companies where your data is used for training and/or is visible to the internal agents whether you want it to or not.


I think it is fair to expect the companies to stick by their demarcation

API / enterprise subs tier is default opt out of training. Personal subsidized tier is default opt in with the option to to opt out.

I don't see a grand conspiracy beyond this.


The Chief Research Office at Open AI just put out this tweet- https://x.com/markchen90/status/2097400166554993041?s=20

Seems it doesn't matter if you opt out or in.. your data will be used for training


Clearly not what he was saying

This works well- you can swipe using touchpad; or use ctrl + arrow keys- free and open-source

https://space-rabbit.app/




The link should be changed to this.


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

Search: