SR2Z

on the other hand the complete dismissal of copyright by AI labs

Courts keep ruling over and over that an LLM trained on copyrighted works qualifies as a transformative work and is therefore fair use. They don't have to dismiss copyright law, this has always been allowed.

The only thing they get in trouble for is pirating the works to get their hands on them.

This is a pretty common clause when a company open sources something that was previously locked away. The AOM AV1 codec has a similar rule for its patent pool to discourage trolling.

"You are violating the DRY principle with code like <blahblah>. Look through the codebase in depth, and identify possible places to consolidate common logic."

Yeah, there's no substitute for taste, but this is not that big of a deal. I infinitely prefer repeated code to crappy, leaky abstractions. Let the model generate some slop, then tighten it up either by hand or with more prompting.

Wasn't the famine a potato-specific blight?

Oh, yeah, you're just wrong. The law explicity states that copyright belongs to HUMAN authors. Not AI. And courts have repeatedly ruled AI generated work cannot be copyrighted. You're the one who seems a little confused.

No, I'm not confused. Go actually read your own link before you get condescending with me:

Assuming that copyrightable works require a human author, works created by humans with the assistance of generative AI might be entitled to copyright protection depending on the nature of human involvement in the creative process.

The only settled legal finding is that copyright must be assigned to human beings.

The guidance of the Copyright Registration Office is not legally binding, which is where I think you may be confused. You do not need to register copyrights because they exist intrinsically when you create works.

If push comes to shove, you prove this in civil court to sue someone. They can argue a fair use defense. For example, training LLMs on copyrighted text has been repeatedly ruled fair use, as a transformative work.

The law is quite clear that how a work was created does not matter for copyright. All that matters is whether or not a thing qualifies as an original work of authorship. The boundaries of what AI-generated work can be copyrighted will be tested in court in the coming years.

Since you didn't address the substance, I guess we'll never know :)

Have you ever met an actual Gen Z? They have no problem with swear words. Many of them love Key and Peele, whose humor is like 90% racist jokes.

If wokeness actually did capture a whole generation then why even bother complaining?

No but it's a useful shorthand to describe a type of bad writing.

I also think that people should focus on substance and not if AI was used, but AI writes like shit and I find myself retching a bit when I have to read long AI-written documents. Do they say something useful? Maybe, but when my eyes are glazing over because it's just so exhausting trying to parse what's written, I can't tell.

I certainly think less of people when they have such poor taste that they think writing like that is acceptable.

Yeah, I'm not sure the level of trust extended to a company like Amazon or Google will also be extended to one run by Elon Musk, who is notorious for not respecting terms like this.

I don't know where you get this idea. A human being who used AI to generate something may actually claim copyright over the product.

You might be getting confused with a court case that ruled that AI could not have sole copyright, but that case just says that only a human being can hold copyright.

Why are you calling this corporate surveillance? These cameras are installed on the government's orders for the government's use.

It's way more nefarious this way!

Because this isn't clearly against the law, nor should it be. If websites want to ban based on IP address lots of innocent users get caught in the cross-fire.

I'm not sure what the solution would look like - maybe Cloudflare's payment required for requests beyond a certain limit? But I think that the world needs user freedoms now more than ever.

I mean, there's a difference between "my IDE opens 0.1s faster" and "my desktop can now write my code for me" and only one of those justifies increasing RAM production.

Right, but "provided again" is what SKILL.md or whatever else are for.

The value of LLMs is that they're stateless. With sufficiently detailed documentation and a well-bounded task, they are quite useful.

I also think this is forward looking and helps reanchor expectations for RAM and memory bandwidth, which historically have been areas where companies do value engineering.

The memory shortages won't last forever; when companies start adding capacity I wouldn't be surprised to see massive sticks of RAM being sold for consumers.

Yes, it tends to be the youths who reason themselves out of religion precisely because they don't have a strong emotional connection to it.

I cannot fathom why you think airport subsidies matter here. Airports are way, way cheaper than HSR.

Yeah drag grows quadratically with speed but reduces with altitude. At 40k ft a modern jet delivers up to 150 pmpg.

Yes the carbon emissions argument is a good one, and I personally prefer taking trains when they're available. I think that people are not appreciative enough of how efficient air travel is.

Sure, but when the 747 was new and gas was a few cents a gallon?

An airplane is a very efficient way to move people. There is no ground friction, the route is pretty direct, and once the airplane is loaded 100 passenger-miles a gallon is not unreasonable.

Even today the EU has to ban short-haul flights along rail corridors because jets are still competitive. I say this as someone who likes trains and chooses them whenever possible.

If you take LinkedIn at face value everyone who uses the Internet is a sociopath who lives for no purpose beyond maximizing shareholder value.

Seriously, some of the most deranged things I've ever read were by relatively normal people trying to promote themselves on LinkedIn.

What people SAY does not matter nearly as much as what everyone KNOWS and it's pretty damn clear that AI is never going to be able to replace humans in complex domains. Every time a frontier lab announces a breakthrough it's pretty obvious that the setup was more complicated than "hey chat prove the Riemann hypothesis."

The world is gonna need skilled human beings to drive LLMs, no matter how desperately some people like to pretend otherwise.

Do you actually have a job? Do you talk to your coworkers?

This is an insane take. Plenty of people are critical of AI at my job despite a big push to use it. I find the comparison to NK distasteful, coming from someone who presumably is pretty well paid and can quit their job whenever they want.

If you're feeling humiliated... well, I don't think it's because your boss wants you to try AI.

Why would a carpentry shop buy hundreds of thousands of dollars of power tools without consulting with their employees to see what they actually need to get their job done more effectively?

I mean, the difference in the metaphor is that we have pretty fully understood carpentry for many hundreds of years. We still find it difficult to write even simple software to address all our needs, as is evidenced by the insane pay in our industry. Carpenters can suggest tools because they know what's out there. The same was not true about LLMs a year ago.

That is way too charitable, people were being fired based on these metrics

People get fired for all kinds of reasons including no reason at all. Oftentimes leadership even lies about the real reasons for firing people because they don't sound good!

I'm gonna be blunt: if you're in software and you refuse to use AI for moral reasons, I think you should be fired. There's being principled and there's being obstinate and the difference between the two is how well you can convince people that you _have_ principles. Most LLM-hating people fall short on this point, because

do I really need to link the Jensen Huang quote?

Sure! Link it again, we all know it's highly immoral when shovel salesmen try to make you want shovels.

If you want to see if the tools work, why don't you just ask your employees? Like any normal employer would?

I do not like this HN take of "let's do this thing that works great in small companies and then just blindly pretend that it'll also work at the largest companies in the world!" No, this doesn't work at "normal companies" because you cannot "just ask" 30k+ employees what they want.

Employees, like EVERYONE ELSE, are resistant to change. If I, as CEO of a company, want to get my company to try Claude I have to measure tokens to see if it's getting used. That's it. There's no wave of delusion here.

I think the context that's missing from this discussion is just how long the 747 was in service. When it was new, pilots didn't directly control the engines - a flight engineer did. There were no moving maps and navigation was done with radio beacons and pilotage (of course, this required lots of fiddling with knobs and a notepad). There were no flight envelope protections, and we knew next to nothing about the dangers of rocketing across the ocean at Mach 0.9. The first encounter between a jetliner and volcanic ash was a 747; despite all four engines flaming out and the whole plane being wreathed in St. Elmo's fire, the pilots were able to safely restart all of them and nobody got hurt. People who love this jet love it because they see the problems it solved and how it kept on rising to the occasion as the world changed around it.

I'm not going to pay 2x ticket prices to keep it alive either, but it is terribly romantic. If human beings are allowed to fall in love with machines this one is as good as any.

I really don't understand this take. If you're a carpentry shop that just bought power tools for the first time and you're worried that your employees are sticking with hand tools because that's what they know, then you look for sawdust.

The goal isn't to have people work at converting wood into sawdust, the point is that if you wanna see if the tools are working you wanna see proof they're actually being used.

I'm sure there were some people cargo-culting this stuff, but suggesting that the people who run FAANG don't understand the dangers of bad metrics is... interesting.

I honestly can't tell if this is ragebait or you believe this.

My friend, if you have a database of license plates extracted from single images taken by multiple cameras, YOU ARE TRACKING UNIQUE VEHICLES ACROSS A REGION.

Terabytes of data don't matter because you don't need to search terabytes, you need to search a few MB of text data. You don't even have to store the original video.

I'm flabbergasted that you look at the Chinese property crisis and say "only the West does irresponsible loans." No, 60% of China's economy is state-run companies and the remaining 40% need political officers. China is just as capable of making shortsighted decisions as the US, and they have already made several devastating ones.

...except Uber STILL faces competition, and I went back to hotels after finding AirBnB too pricy.

It is good and proper that people aim to create monopolies, as long as they want to do that in a productive and legal way! Monopolies are inherently dangerous, but the truth is that acquiring and maintaining one is not straightforward unless you can get the government to ban your competitors.

I mean, yeah. Their point is that the substances are extremely chemically similar to the point where they can be treated as different intensities of the same drug.

While forming unions is a protected right in the US, it is incredibly stupid to signal that you will try to form a union during a job interview.

That GPU costs 25k which means you really should have a rack to put it in. It's not realistic.

Where are you finding ML-grade GPUs that you can actually use to train a modern model for *$350*!? Dude, let me know so I can find some.