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

That's the actual problem with CA in general if you haven't noticed. Be good and watch them take everything.

It does seem like most of the American economy since factories left has been information asymmetry. The travel agents had the "special phone number" to call to get someone on a boat for half the price. Probably a little bit more than that. We're going to entering a time of crushing economic conditions.

Ironically, the advent of LLMs brings back the information asymmetry, bringing back the value of personal connections / recommendations.

Considering that the LLMs used by most people are owned by large companies, I'm not so sure about that long term.

Is early days yet.


I am not seeing the connection between ownership of LLMs and the public benefiting from personal connections due to digital information being untrustworthy due to LLMs.

For example, for employers and employees, hiring someone is easier if you know someone who knows someone.


Our next trick, getting people to stop writing code (so we can stop writing python)

So the fraud doesn't matter? What journalist would you trust so this story is real?

You deal with the fraud in front of you first. Here the most prominent (and most egregious!) fraud is crafting stories out of nothing that tightly adhere to predrawn conclusions.

There will never be enough facts (actual or otherwise) to sprinkle into this creator's stories that his tales will ever be anything other than bad-faith fiction.


So no truth is enough. It's so against your personal belief system that it's worth ignoring.

When content is untruthful as delivered, whatever truth it contains is of the lowest possible value. In this place, we are merely picking bones from garbage.

A better space to occupy is one shared by folks who are acting in good faith.


I don't wish to discuss anything with someone that talks in memes. You're using it to avoid discussion. What specifically is not truthful in the video?

> I don't wish to discuss anything with someone that talks in memes. [ed: yet, you next indicate otherwise by asking] What specifically is not truthful in the video?

You are being inconsistent in your expressions here. This makes this conversation a matter of guesswork.

Will you take seriously, the evidence that the video creator has a long history of bad faith? If so, why keep trying to advance his video? If not, then that is where this discussion is.


The larger story is everywhere:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDWWDyckVxk

This hit the news a few weeks ago. Nick's coverage is a specific branch that has not been covered yet.

I also asked you early on in our discussion which journalist you would trust, and you did not answer. I like Nick Shirley, and I don't think he does bad faith reporting. If that sentence makes you want to leave the conversation, then congrats, just another leftist that does not want to engage on the arguments. I answered your question, now you answer mine.


> I like Nick Shirley, and I don't think he does bad faith reporting.

This seems to be where we're at then. Is your position that the specifics of Shirley's activities (reported by Reuters) are

   1) things that did happen or
   2) things that didn't happen?
Reuters ref: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pro-trump-influencers-fire-...

I'm not big on gotchas btw. I'm obvious with my intent because it's productive.

Disclosure that I am a recovering conservative.


> I also asked you early on in our discussion which journalist you would trust, and you did not answer.

Anyone at Techdirt. Joseph Cox and likely anyone at 404 Media. April Glaser, Marcy Wheeler, Elizabeth Nolan Brown (mostly editor now). Others (not coming to mind atm).


Thank you for both replies. I have been hit hard with work (I'm building my own house and work full time) so it's been hard to formulate a response and research. What I was going to do is try to email all of these journalists and ask for their honest opinion about the story. That's it.

A good faith journalist can put out high or low quality content, mostly depending on their wisdom and skill.

But a content creator operating in bad faith - all they can do is craft counterproductive, toxic narratives¹.

Before asking others to consume Shirley's content, fully determine that Shirley is acting in good faith. Besides being kind, it's also due diligence.

    ¹(by cherry picking unrelated facts, by disingenuously tying those facts together, by innuendo, by debunked research and by supporting all of it with other bad faith content)

> Is it possible for an entire social structure to be based on lies? Is it possible for a society to pretend to be something completely different to what it actually is? The ethnographic record says yes. In fact, it’s the norm.

Same can be said for UFOs. Whether or not they exist, since there is no evidence that has a reliable chain of custody we end up with people saying there is no evidence. In fact you can be a direct witness and be told - no, you were on drugs and the picture you took of that UFO was a drug fueled weekend in Photoshop.

And society will continue to do this.


It's not like chatgpt suddenly messages you at 3am and says, I don't feel well. It's all time that you talked to it.

I feel like the number of incidents related to "fully public S3 buckets" has gone down after AWS made it nearly impossible to miss the notice.

Hopefully prices stay the same, I run my small apps on groq. I get good enough summarization and simple agents from gpt120b which is on 15 cents for a million input tks.

Can you list any internet facing apps you have that use Groq? Looking into them myself because of the speed

Still in development, but yes, the speed is absolutely nice.

A wikipedia article has to attribute a source, and their sources are biased af.

749 for an M4 air at Amazon right now

Try running anything interesting on these 8gb of ram.

You need 96gb or 128gb to do non trivial things. That is not yet 749 usd


Fair enough, but they start at 16GB nowadays.

The M4 starts with 16GB, though that can also be tight for local LLMs. You can get one with 24GB for $1149 right now though, which is good value.

899 at B&H started today 12/24

64gb is fine.

This subthread is about the Macbook Air, which tops out at 32 GB, and can't be upgraded further.

While browsing the Apple website, it looks like the cheapest Macbook with 64 GB of RAM is the Macbook Pro M4 Max with 40-core GPU, which starts at $3,899, a.k.a. more than five times more expensive than the price quoted above.


I have an M1 Max w/ 64gb that cost me much less than that -- you don't have to buy the latest model brand new.

if you are going for 64GB, you need at least a Max CPU or you will be bandwidth/GPU limited.

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

Search: