1 karma · joined February 3, 2026
LLMs have neither muscles nor memories. They're token combinators based on statistical correlation, no more, no less.
That's not to say LLMs can't be useful when they string together tokens. Quite the contrary, in fact. But let's not pretend LLMs are something they're not.
Why not? That's kind of the whole point of having accounts here on HN. To create an environment where folks can discuss stuff in good faith. Posting history is public because the posts were public in the first place and they represent who you are (or present yourself to be) on the site.
It allows each of us to be authentically 'us'. Do you not stand by the things you've posted in the past four plus years?
If you do, why do you care if people are looking at your posting history?
If you don't stand by what you've written here in the past, you're likely not posting in good faith.
Either way, why are you concerned about folks looking at the stuff you've publicly posted in the past?
GP said:
>> The legislature >Congress 53/45 R; House 219/215 R
I said:
>It's the Senate, not "Congress".
That may well be the intent but, at least according to the reporting, it's not all that effective in disenfranchising many people:
Even counting people flagged in error, the first bulk searches using SAVE
haven’t validated the president’s claims that voting by noncitizens is
widespread. At least seven states with a total of about 35 million registered
voters have publicly reported the results of running their voter rolls through
the system. Those searches have identified roughly 4,200 people — about 0.01%
of registered voters — as noncitizens. This aligns with previous findings[0]
that noncitizens rarely register to vote[1].
What's quite disturbing is that these folks have accessed Social Security Administration (SSA) databases to "cross-check" their information, but that data has come from (IIUC) copies of SSA data taken[2] without authorization by DOGE staffers.
All in all this is not only a huge overreach, but also validates what the experts have been saying all along: voting, or even attempting to register to vote by non-citizens is vanishingly rare.
[0] https://georgiarecorder.com/briefs/georgia-gop-secretary-of-...
[1] https://www.votebeat.org/michigan/2025/04/03/15-noncitizen-v...
[2] https://www.csoonline.com/article/4046997/whistleblower-doge...
The Rabbit's Thesis
Scene: It's a fine sunny day in the forest; and a rabbit is sitting outside his burrow, tippy-tapping on his lap top. Along comes a fox, out for a walk.
Fox: "What are you working on?" Rabbit: "My thesis." Fox: "Hmmmmm. What is it about?" Rabbit: "Oh, I'm writing about how rabbits eat foxes."
(incredulous pause) Fox: "That's ridiculous! Any fool knows that rabbits don't eat foxes!" Rabbit: "Come with me and I'll show you!"
They both disappear into the rabbit's burrow. After a few minutes, gnawing on a fox bone, the rabbit returns to his lap top and resumes typing.
Soon a wolf comes along and stops to watch the hard working rabbit.
(Tippy-tap, tippy-tap, tippy-tippy-tap).
Wolf: "What's that you are writing?" Rabbit: "I'm doing a thesis on how rabbits eat wolves."
(loud guffaws). Wolf: "You don't expect to get such rubbish published, do you?" Rabbit: "No problem. Do you want to see why?"
The rabbit and the wolf go into the burrow, and again the rabbit returns by himself. This time he is patting his stomach. He goes back to his typing.
(Tippy-tap, tippy-tap, tippy-tippy-tap).
Finally a bear comes along and asks, "What are you doing?"
Rabbit: "I'm doing a thesis on how rabbits eat bears." Bear: "Well that's absurd!" Rabbit: "Come into my home and I'll show you."
SCENE: Inside the rabbit's burrow. In one corner, there is a pile of fox bones. In another corner is a pile of wolf bones. On the other side of the room a huge lion is belching and picking his teeth.
MORAL: It doesn't matter what you choose for a thesis topic. It doesn't matter what you use for your data. It doesn't even matter if your topic makes sense. What matters is who you have for a thesis advisor.
It's the Senate, not "Congress". Colloquially, "Congress" usually refers to the House of Representatives.
>SCOTUS (5-4 R)
> interprets the laws.
Actually, it's 6-3, not 5-4.
I get that you're not from or live in the US. Please understand, I'm not trying to insult or demean you. But you're making statements that are not true.
I believe the term is "FTFY." And you're welcome.