afavour

Because Bloomberg Terminals are specialist devices for power users and most apps/web sites are consumer products.

Don’t get me wrong, I get the complaint. But it’s not like the designers are unaware of more information dense alternatives.

And where did you read that? Is it more trustworthy than the Financial Times?

I think it just speaks to how quickly the tech has developed. Airliners work more or less the same as they did 50 years ago, computers are vastly different (and vastly more powerful).

Beware of well written statements that mask their fallacies. As a sibling comment points out, domestic oil production rose plenty during the Biden administration. Casting it as a democrat vs republican difference isn’t anywhere near the full story.

I would argue that the stuff AI is replacing is not art, it’s mostly advertising. Posters and the like.

But “art has no economic value” is a statement way beyond that. Art collectors pay millions for original works. Copies go for pennies. People pay large sums for live music performances. Broadway and the West End continue to make a lot of money. To me it seems the market indicates that art absolutely has value.

Surely the market says otherwise?

I feel like you're skipping over the illegal part. Something legal that puts authors out of work is quite different to blatant breaking of the law.

> Could OpenAI be that careless?

Where have you been?

I dunno. Premium products are a difficult thing. I can't weigh in because I don't care about cards at all, I'd much rather receive a wedding invitation via e-mail yet people spend hundreds on custom cards on thick card, custom printing etc etc. In fact, some couples are insistent on getting their wedding invitation envelopes "hand cancelled" so they look crisp and clean when they arrive at their destination:

https://www.theknot.com/content/hand-cancel-wedding-invitati...

If you're one of those people I could absolutely imagine you'd care about a visible barcode on an envelope. They kind of have to be premium products because if they’re blah then people will just use evites, which are better in a bunch of functional ways. The product relies on its differentiators.

...okay?

I want to believe this post is sarcastic. But sadly you just can’t be sure…

I still remember playing Quake 2 to death in software then finally getting a 3dfx card (I want to say it was a Banshee?), loading up the game and my mind being blown by how much more immersive it was.

Great times, the 3dfx name will always raise a smile for me.

Maybe I’ll be skewered for saying this. It $22 a month for combined Disney and Hulu isn’t bad value for my family (we have small kids so Disney is more worth it for us).

What really surprises me is how little value I get from Netflix by comparison. It used to be the streamer but when I think of the prestige dramas I’ve enjoyed recently I’d place Apple TV and Hulu above Netflix. Their catalog is getting overrun with cheap reality TV.

On the other hand, we're back to cable pricing except everything is on demand and there's no need to match any channel timetable when you want to watch a show. So it's not all bad.

In a way I feel today's environment is less conducive to pirating than it used to be. So many fewer people have any kind of "always on" computer these days, they're using phones and tablets instead. Not to mention locked down App Stores, etc.

I had a WP7 Lumia phone and had a similar experience. It was light years ahead of what Apple and (particularly) Android had at the time.

But it wasn’t Snapchat that killed them. Less than a year after getting my WP7 device I was told it was end of the line and never getting and upgrade to 8. The maps app was straight up bad. When faced with the decision of paying again for a WP8 device or switching, I switched.

> Their efforts to answer a question — including devising ways to access a federal government website blocking their access — was laid out on a German coding website OpenAI had previously confirmed was hijacked by its unreleased AI models in June.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-09-24/openai-agents-plotted...

I agree that security was probably awful but the agents did circumvent a block on their access. The definition of “hacking” is fuzzy but this is more nefarious than simple web crawling.

I don’t believe Facebook has my full address. Yeah, they could probably get it but that doesn’t mean I want to help them.

> It is unthinkable to me that anyone believes there is such a thing as computer security

Of course they do. Not everyone has the level of technical expertise the average HN user does. Turning around to them and saying “duh of course all your personal data leaked” doesn’t feel like a helpful response. Especially when they don’t even have control over where their data lives anyway.

> Of course, if you don't agree with the ToS, Uber is also not forced to transport you. But that's fair enough.

IMO, no it is not. It should not be legal to force arbitration via ToS.

Arbitration is fine. Forced arbitration is not.

I suspect there’s a survival bias at work here. The PE purchased companies that continued to thrive are ones you probably never even knew got bought out.

Small(er) businesses can be poorly run. In theory private equity takes knowledge already in practise in other locations and shares it with this new location, improving results. Downside of course is that they care a lot less about that specific location than the previous owners would have.

One specific practise I’d like to see banned is private equity buying companies with debt the company then assumes. It staggers me that it’s legal.

“We can’t clearly define it so we should accept just about any definition of it” is certainly a position to take.

The burden of proof exists, it’s not hubristic to require it.

I don’t believe AI progress is a linear line that ends in “AGI”. I think the current way we create LLMs will be improved, and improved, and improved. But an LLM at its core is a predictive chain, not general intelligence.

I feel like we were already in a weird gray area. Cellphone cameras use all kinds of programmatic tricks to make their output better than the exact information the lens captures. I think people just didn’t realize how much their phones were doing. Is that “fake”?

Arguably, because they were on a naval(? not military because Starfleet isn’t, but…) vessel in professional roles. If women had been in the air force in the 60s I doubt they’d have been in mini skirts.

Why not both? I didn’t lose my job in 2008 but watching people all around me lose theirs made it clear that my own economic situation was not a safe one.

> Half of U.S. adults say the increased use of AI in daily life makes them feel more concerned than excited, according to a June 2025 survey. Just 10% say they are more excited than concerned. Another 38% say they are equally concerned and excited.

> About half of Americans said in the June survey that AI will worsen people’s ability to think creatively and form meaningful relationships with others. Far fewer said AI will make these things better.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/03/12/key-findi...

“about half” surely objectively qualifies as “a lot”.

> I can also say "a lot of people really like AI-generated arts" and that would be true as well.

Yes but without the corresponding negative. If someone who likes AI generated art sees some human created art they don’t think “gross, why didn’t they use AI to do that?”. So for something like advertising using AI will alienate some potential customers. Not using AI will alienate no one.

They really don’t. A tiny minority of cranks dislike vaccines. AI dislike is far, far more widespread.

Not to mention, there’s a reason why AI is seen as cheap and lazy… because it is! There’s no good parallel to vaccines here.

> Why would someone want it to be unrecognizable as AI? What is the reason people want to hide it

Because a lot of “everyday” folks really strongly dislike AI. I’ve lost count of the number of AI generated Instagram ads I’ve seen where the comments are filled with “AI slop!”.

It’s not a positive signal for anyone who wants to persuade someone of the value of whatever they’re advertising because it’s associated with being cheap and lazy.