HN user
This website tracks AI model political leanings:
Grok differs from some of the other models (it's more libertarian, and more right wing), but all models have their biases - particularly ChatGPT, which sits to the economic left of 81% of US adults. See https://trakkr.ai/bias/findings
In the EU that's the norm not the exception. A little taste of Europe for our American friends :-S
Just my idea. I'm working on a side project https://newsavista.com/invite/ASAD68923E that aggregates news and tracks news trends and changing sentiment on the major stories. With cheap cloud LLMs (and "free" local LLMs) it turns out to be a trivial feature to build.
This is excellent.
A minor suggestion - I'd like to be able to render the current graph taller (full height of my browser window).
Also some sentiment analysis on the "people" graphs would be very insightful (particularly for the likes of Edward Snowdon, Julian Assange, Elon Musk and Sam Altman). Perhaps colour the area under the graph red-orange-green based on the sentiment?
The Guardian either wilfully or ignorantly publishes stats from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry. Anyone who repeats these stats is an accessory to the terrorist regime in charge of Gaza.
It was Hamas’s war - started by a terrorist organisation butchering, abducting and raping young unarmed citizens.
The scale of the aftermath is what happens when an advanced democracy faces an existential threat from a terrorist-led neighbouring region, and must act to neutralise that threat for the safety of its citizens.
General Electric was just fine when Thomas Edison died in 1931. And Apple was fine after the tragic early death of Steve Jobs.
Companies like this become bigger than their founders.
And I'm sure many on the Left would argue that Tesla and SpaceX would be healthier companies without Elon Musk.
Although I tend to differ on that, having owned $TSLA for a long time. Never bet against Elon!
Just heard back from Google regarding my report of the ad that served malware to me:
Dear Chris,
We’re writing to let you know that we reviewed your report (ID 579240969280369002).
Here's what we found
We decided not to take this ad down. We found that the ad doesn’t go against Google’s policies, which prohibit certain content and practices that we believe to be harmful to users and the overall online ecosystem.
I think the safest thing I can do right now is avoid using Google for searches and instead use Claude, which at least has functioning safeguards, and is less easily poisoned than Google Search.
Firstly, Mike, thank you for all you've done with HomeBrew - an amazing product. None of my ire was directed at you or HomeBrew.
I am so frustrated at Google, not just for this incident, but for many reasons (like their inexplicable shutdown of my own Adsense account years ago, and their neglect of several products I'd built against or bought). When they act, they leave us with no recourse. I feel anxious being dependent on them, even for simple stuff like my email account.
They are sufficiently big that they no longer care about the little guy anymore. They are only interested in swallowing up all the World's data and cashing in on Workspace.
This demonstration is the clearest I've seen so far, showing the gulf between Opus and Fable for app creation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzJCly4YgDQ
The Age of Empires clone (and the difference in graphics quality/creativity between Opus and Fable) is at the end of the video and I was blown away.
Notice how this guy prompts the models. Very detailed, with technical requirements and steering. He's going for a one-shot build and he nailed it.
I reported the ad to Google immediately, and when I checked back an hour later the search results were clear. But I suspect it's only a matter of time before another one slips through the net.
I think what happens is a legitimate business with a history of legit Google advertising gets compromised by malware, and then their Google adverts are flipped.
Slightly tangential, but I went to set up Homebrew today on a new Mac. Stupidly clicked the top link in Google (which was sponsored but not obviously so). Took me to a spoof Homebrew page. I ran the script. Typed in my Mac password like a fool when prompted, and nothing happened. Then I realised what an idiot I’d been.
Claude found evidence of an exfiltration malware on my laptop and I inmediately wiped the device and started again. Revoked all my keys, rotated all my passwords. And now I pray the damage is contained.
I can’t believe that Google would have let this slip through. I probably wasn't the only one that got caught out.
The whole premise of this article is troubling. I don’t want there to be a single standard for vertically-integrated EV design.
I want BYD to compete with Tesla, each having distinct stacks. I want Ford to differ from GM.
The pace of EV innovation since the 2010s came from companies like Tesla breaking the mold and doing things differently from legacy auto, sometimes with stubbornness and audacity that caused the media to shame them, and claim they’d be bankrupt within weeks.
IMO we need that sense of urgency and existentialism injected back into the industry. We need EVs to be exciting if people are to be inspired to make the switch. With one or two exceptions (eg charging standards), the last thing we need is the imposition of supranational standards, regulations and homogenisation that brings innovation to a grinding halt and leaves all carmakers with a lowest-common-denominator generic solution
As soon as data starts being exfiltrated to Google (or any Big Tech firm), be sure that governments will demand their copy of the stream too.
The non-disclosure clauses in mass surveillance legislation will ensure the process is opaque to users.
You’ll only find out about it when your door is smashed down and all your devices are seized, because Chrome’s crappy 4GB AI model misinterpreted an innocent photo of your kid in a paddling pool.
Never expected to see the Critical Drinker mentioned on HN. I find myself agreeing with the majority of points he brings up in his videos, but I suspect the majority on HN would disagree with him.
Sadly you're right. At times like this I wish Silicon Valley was in Texas or Florida rather than one of the most leftwing / collectivist states in America.
The software, OS and chips are completely irrelevant to the discussion about the physical design of batteries.
As for ergonomic differences, I see sliding phones, folding phones, big phones, small phones, minimal phones, phones covered in buttons.
I think Hollywood has been churning out derivative content for a while, and catering for "modern audiences" (as opposed to the silent majority) too much.
One or two exceptions - Project Hail Mary, for example.
But the decline of Marvel, Star Trek and Star Wars franchises has been stark.
https://www.youtube.com/@TheCriticalDrinker has some great commentary on the problem.
Also, a number of other factors:
* massive TVs are cheap now
* people behave disrespectfully in cinemas
* cinema tickets are now unaffordable for the low end of the market
* the experience hasn't modernised and become luxy enough to retain the high end of the market
* streaming services have high budgets now * Samsung Electronics
* Apple
* Xiaomi
* Oppo (includes OnePlus)
* Vivo
* Huawei
* Honor
* Motorola Mobility
* realme
* Google
* Sony
* Nokia
* Asus
* Nothing
* HTC
* ZTE
* Fairphone
* LG Electronics
This should be for the market to decide, not EU bureaucrats.
If I want a thicker, clunkier, less waterproof phone with a user-replaceable battery, I can already buy a Fairphone or a Samsung Galaxy XCover6 Pro, or whatever.
The reason people buy iPhones and flagship Samsung phones is they want the benefits that come from a design that doesn't have to make sacrifices to accomodate a user-replaceable battery.
Alongside talk from the UK Labour government about intervening on VPNs, I'm getting uneasy vibes about this move, especially since Microsoft is one of the most government-friendly corporations in the big tech arena.
The surveillance state is growing more sinister every day (especially in the UK), but the efforts are somewhat thwarted by the existence of VPNs.
Once they find a way to undermine VPNs, the UK govt will have literal CCP-level control over our access to information and communication.
It would be illegal to post such rhetoric, and I can't name a single social network CEO who's been investigated and found guilty of posting such rhetoric. Perhaps I missed a court case somewhere?
You could literally be describing any modern day social network with those slurs.
Their posts on X are getting multiple millions of views. Yes, that has declined, but I need to see whether their viewership on Facebook has declined similarly before I can pass judgement on X.
People don’t use social media in the same way they did ten years ago.
And in any case, they’re still getting massive viewership on X by most people’s standards, surely?
I’m not convinced “X is declining” is a good faith argument here.
I’m sure I could rig up my own email server with replication and all sorts. I recall doing this many years ago, running SpamAssasin etc.
Turns out the quality of things like self hosted spam filtering is no match for the world’s most notorious data ingestion and analysis company
Your comment has more than a whiff of “never driven a Tesla”
I use Gmail with my own domain (you have to pay for the privilege but Google Workspace has been very reliable and flexible for my purposes)
I'd rather use Google's web storage than my own. I don't have the time nor the expertise to implement multi-region replication etc.
I understand that granting Google access to one's emails might be a dealbreaker for journalists, dissidents etc, though - so clearly Gmail is no good if you have legitimate need for PGP.
If we cared about reducing road casualties, then objectively speaking, we should ban bikes. Roads are designed for cars (people in protective metal boxes with hundreds of sophisticated safety features).
Roads were never intended for people on flimsy two wheeled contraptions with nothing more than a polystyrene cap to protect them.
I'm not defending civilian harm. I'm defending the sovereign rights of a country to defend its civilians from warmongering neighbours.
Gaza doesn't get a free pass to fire rockets at Israeli towns, invade it, and massacre thousands of its civilians on the basis that Gaza's population is allegedly 50% children.
In your world view, at what point would Israel be entitled to fight back against Gaza? How many Nova Festivals before Israel is allowed to defend itself?
And what is Israel allowed to do, bearing in mind Gaza's government urges its civilians to "bare their chests" to Israel (i.e. act as human shields), and Gaza bases military assets in schools and hospitals (well documented)?
I'm interested to know which of my arguments has been "debunked"?
Gaza lost a war it started. The civilian casualties could have been avoided if it hadn't started the war.
Iran is losing a war it started (by attacking Israel with hundreds of missiles, attacking civilian shipping, sponsoring terror groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis who commit regular attrocities).
These wars are "total wars." Total war is the only option left to Israel and its allies, because as long as Hamas and the Ayatollah regime exists (with their written and well-documented aim to "annihilate" Israel and Jews), then Israeli civilians face an existential threat. The last remaining Jewish nation faces an existential threat. This is a direct consequence of the rabid anti-semitism that's inbuilt into Islamist regimes.
You are not happy for Israel to win its total wars.
Were you happy for the allies to win WW2? From my PoV, 70K UK civilians lost their lives, vs 2M German civilians. The civilian death toll was massively one-sided. But it was Germany that started a total war, and I hope you and I can agree that it was Germany (with its genocidal anti-semitism among other appalling characteristics) that deserved to lose the war.
Thank you for being honest about where you get your news from (the links at the bottom of the post). This helps explain your worldview.
(non affiliated - not an advert) I would recommend trying Ground News, which helped me understand the biases within sources, and helped showed me the blindspots in news coverage that I'd missed.
I'd like you to cast your mind back to the acts that started these two horrendous wars - Gaza's genocidal invasion of Israeli towns where they massacred teenagers at a music festival, paraded raped women through the streets of Gaza to the cheers of onlookers, and forced young people to watch as their parents and siblings were blown up with hand grenades.
This isn't hyperbole. This isn't a politicised Western interpretation (a la "truthout.org") - this is an account of the videos shared by Hamas themselves, which were shown to Western journalists.
Hamas had to be stopped by force, and I support Israel's right to defend its own existence. If Hamas wishes to use human shields (as it has outright admitted it does), then the tragic collateral civilian deaths are the responsibility of Hamas.
And in Iran, the systematic rape and torture of young people and LGBT people. The massacre of 30,000+ peaceful protesters. And the outright genocidal intent of its leadership ("Death to America, Death to Israel, a curse upon the Jews").
The Ayatollahs had to be stopped before they built nuclear weapons. There will be tragic collateral civilian deaths, but fewer in the long term than if the IRGC are allowed to continue roaming the streets unchecked.