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

Other advantages to generating content: (1) fewer copyright issues. (2) No creators to pay, just GPU bills scaling with the use of the platform. (3) a much smaller critical mass.

Given these advantages I expect the current "social media" to be replaced with a new one, rather than them pivoting. The next big thing after tiktok might be something that only has generated content, where a last final bit of "social" is taken out of "social media".


Generating stuff is very cheap compared to building and training the model. When you have your model done you're incentivized to use it as much as possible. Maybe even considering the sunken costs.

Why can't it be the actual tiktok? By simply winning competition with humans i.e. whereas vast majority of humans see their pay go too low to bother to continue?

I don't see consistent and correct as separate. Consistent is correct, and correct is consistent.


Be sure to be consistent with each of the edge cases in order to be correct!


This sounds like how I think.

But for me, it often results in situations where I think much harder and longer than others but fail to act.

I learned to sometimes act instead of thinking more, because by acting I gain information I could not have learned by thinking.

Perhaps this human insight can be applied to working with LLMs. Perhaps not :)


Yeah, I've been griping about LLM overconfidence for years, as somebody who is racked with self-doubt and second-guessing. On one hand, my own low opinion of myself made me a terrible mentor and manager, because having a similarly zero-trust policy towards my colleagues' work caused no end of friction (especially as a founder where people looked up to me for validation). On the other hand, i don't know very many top-tier practitioners that don't exhibit significantly more self-doubt than an off-the-shelf LLM.

Hence this blog post. I will say I've got a dozen similar tricks baked into my Claude config, but I'm not sure they've helped any.


I relate to this a lot— I treat my colleagues' work with suspicion and distrust not because I don't trust them but because that's also my stance toward my own work, like "what is this BS? Is it absolutely necessary? Can it be half the length by leveraging a library or ignoring error handling in cases where a panic/crash is no worse than a controlled exit?"

I find working with copilot is just catnip to someone like this because it's endlessly willing to iterate and explore the problem space, certainly well past the point where a normal person would be like are you for real can we just merge this and move on.


"Let it crash" is a sentence that gets attention. It makes a person want to know more about it, as it sounds controversial and different. "Let it heal" doesn't have that.


It also has a deeper philosophical meaning of unexpected software bugs should be noisy and obvious instead of causing silently corruption or misleading user experience. If monitoring doesn’t catch the failure, customers will and it can be fixed right away (whether it’s the software, a hardware error, dependency issue, etc.).

A web service returning a 500 error code is a lot more obvious than a 200 with an invalid payload. A crashed app with a stack trace is easier to debug and will cause more user feedback than an app than hangs in a retry loop.

When I had to deal with these things in the Java world, it meant not blindly handling or swallowing exceptions that business code had no business caring about. Does your account management code really think it knows how to properly handle an InterruptedException? Unless your answer is rollback and reset the interrupted flag it’s probably wrong. Can’t write a test for a particular failure scenario? That better blow up loudly with enough context that makes it possible to understand the error condition (and then write a test for it).


I have always felt 'Let it crash' is an unfortunate turn of phrase that gets a lot of negative attention.

A 'crash' in most other language/ecosystem means likely a catastrophic failure of the application, ending in a core dump.

Erlang's error handling is way more nuanced than that blunt phrase indicates.


One of the biggest usability problems with Python dependencies is that the name you import might be different from the name that you use to install the package.

So if you find some script on the web that has an `import foo` at the top, you cannot just `pip install foo`. Instead, you'll have to do some research into which package was originally used. Maybe it's named `pyfoo` or `foolib`.

Compare that to for example Java, which does not have that problem, thanks to Reverse Domain Name Notation. That is a much better system.


"install name == import name" cannot work in Python, because when you `pip install foo`, you may get more than one top-level package. Or you may get a single-file module. Or you may, validly per the spec, get no Python code whatsoever. (For example, you could publish large datasets separately from your data science library, as separate wheels which could be listed as optional dependencies.)

The lack of good namespacing practice is a problem. Part of the reason for it, in my estimation, is that developers have cargo-culted around a mistaken understanding of `__init__.py`.


Ecclesiastes 1:9

    What has been will be again,
    what has been done will be done again;
    there is nothing new under the sun.


Pretty sure Nas was first though. I can't even find Ecclesiastes on Tidal.


Whoever said it first was lying.


the joke lands a lot better in the original Cylon.


Score:5, Funny


"XOR" as encryption probably refers to one-time-pad encryption, which is a very secure encryption strategy if done well, albeit often impractical.

(Note: I'm not saying anything about this specific code, which I have not looked at)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-time_pad


Is bluetooth not usable anymore?


Bluetooth caps out at a few tens of KByte/s.

Not very nice when you're trying to transfer an image several MB in size.


The average file's size largely increased, bluetooth speed didn't (maybe *=2 with EDR)


I don't think becoming vegetarian helps. From the article:

> The study found evidence that food processing is a likely source of microplastic contamination, as highly processed protein products (like fish sticks, chicken nuggets, tofu, and plant-based burgers, among others) contained significantly more microplastics per gram than minimally processed products (items like packaged wild Alaska pollock, raw chicken breast, and others).

Note the tofu and plant-based burgers.


If you look at the actual data, tofu had the third lowest concentration of microplastic particles per gram (0.03, vs 0.02 for pork loin chop and 0.01 for whole chicken breast).

The press release does a disservice to the study by referring to the highly processed group as a whole and not excluding tofu. For reference, the breaded shrimp and fish sticks were measured to have 1.2 and 0.26 particles per gram.

Table 3.7 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S026974912...

Regardless if a processed food like tofu has minimal plastic concentration, I would assume minimally processed whole plant food like beans and nuts would also have low microplastic exposure. The study found little total plastic from packaging, their evidence pointed towards the processing.


Did you account for calories? Beef has ~3-4X the calories per gram of tofu.

I would guess plants have more microplastics as they just pull things out of the soil and store them (why many plants have a ton of heavy metals). Animals at least have some systems for filtering and processing unwanted items.


Plant based meat substitutes are vegan junk food. There are other things to eat that are not meat.


"When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure." (Goodhart's law)


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

Search: