elicash

This was my favorite of the genre https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtLDAkxf8Do

From your comment, I suspect you know much more about this topic than me.

But it doesn't seem from the link that they are running extra tests, just that they are charging for the secondary diagnosis. That's odd, if there's liability for not testing or treating it, isn't it?

I didn’t quote it, but they also say at the link it didn’t change treatment.

That’s why they think it’s BS

Additionally, BCBS reports that hospitals are using AI to find ways to charge more money: https://www.bcbs.com/about-us/association-news/bcbsa-analysi...

> New analysis from the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association (BCBSA) finds that hospital systems are increasingly billing patient hospital stays as more medically complex, driving nearly $1 billion in additional healthcare costs in just two years. [...]

> More than 60% of hospital systems are now using AI-enabled technologies that can scan lab results and electronic records to identify secondary diagnoses, which could move a patient into a higher-severity, higher-reimbursement billing category.

"I baked this cake on my own from scratch!"

"Oh?! You harvested and ground the wheat? You extracted the sugar? You laid the eggs?"

I have no problem with coffee shops intentionally using AI, that said...

It's also worth keeping in mind that a shop owner might google "clip art cup of coffee" and the result was created by somebody who used AI, and the shop owner wouldn't necessarily realize it. At some point, 99% of clip art available online is going to be AI.

I meant to say it was NOT how I worded it!

That might be true for them to know it was AI. Which yes, was how I worded it. But not necessarily good enough for it to be differentiated from everything else.

For example, in the Bootstrap days everything looked like Bootstrap and users got used to that, even if users hadn't specifically heard of the CSS framework.

The charts are particularly great.

I will say I'm afraid to use this style because Gemini seems to love it so much and therefore users will make assumptions about how the website was created.

Here's the context for the "abundance" reference, for those curious:

> I believe that AI could cure most major diseases in the next 5–10 years, greatly accelerate economic growth rates, create a world of abundance and empowerment, and usher in a renaissance of democracy and freedom.

Whether that matches your description of it, I'll leave for folks to decide for themselves.

This is not me putting some unrelated pet issue into this topic; to evaluate David Sack's post arguing against government regulation, it's entirely fair to examine whether he has been consistent. He hasn't. He supported a government-imposed pause on Anthropic because of his political disagreements with the CEO.

Your initial reply of "poor Anthropic" was vague, but I interpreted it as implying that we shouldn't stick to a principle given they are unsympathetic in some way.

A principled individual could dislike Anthropic and still not favor using government to punish speech.

David Sachs wants to use government to punish people he disagrees with politically, like Dario.

He supported the Department of War's illegal actions against Anthropic.

He supported the Trump administration's temporary export controls against Anthropic, the first government-imposed pause.

He has said Anthropic has created a monopoly, implying that they should be broken up.

I don't take him seriously when he says he doesn't favor government action. He favors it when he doesn't like their speech.

I haven't used a foldable. Is it hard to click on buttons, for example, that happened to be place down the seam? Or has that type of thing been long solved?

The product isn't out yet. I imagine there will be a setting for dock on left or right, if that's what you're referencing.

It was 1991 and 2002 AUMFs that were repealed in December 2025. I appreciate the correction.

(That said, the 2001 AUMF hasn't been invoked against Iran.)

There is no AUMF, and I believe Congress already repealed previous ones?

I thought the remaining issues were a dispute related to the timing requirements in the War Powers Resolution, plus unsettled Constitutional law.

I think that's a smart point and seems likely to be attempted.

It presents interesting questions, though. Right now, insurance companies are incentivized to fight for their customer in court against the other driver because they don't want to pay out.

But if the FSD provider is also the insurer, they aren't a neutral party if the dispute is between whether FSD is to blame or if the driver is to blame. It could become adversarial, let's say if the data in the car shows the driver wasn't looking at the road at the moment of the crash and therefore wasn't ready to take over for self-driving.

There might be ways around this, but it's a challenge to overcome. I'd want my insurance company to protect me against my FSD provider, too.

(My point is complicated by the fact that liability coverage is separate, admittedly. My insurer might not want to pay out if I was driving drunk, for example.)

I think insurance companies might beat the regulators, in terms of incentivizing safer vehicles via discounts.

Which would then offset these monthly subscriptions by car companies.

1. After reading this article, I'm going to hear this music https://youtu.be/KVdqwD_bcPs?si=qo_3_9yZWiW3zEQW&t=86 in my head the next time I'm waiting for a response from my LLM.

2. The author understandably takes issue with the 35 hours. But I do think it's wrong to confuse the time it takes with the number of lines it ultimately writes. To quote Blaise Pascal, "I would have written a shorter letter, but did not have the time."

Apple should have put these videos out at WWDC. It would not have spoiled anything; everybody already knew the folding phone was coming and they could have just said it was related to any large device.

Way too late for developers to tackle this now for the Duo release.

I remember that HN discussion, but it seemed to me from the outside that after that post they got Google as a sponsor and I just had assumed the community was rallying together for them a bit.

But I guess not.

Too bad, they seem like such good people. Not that they're dead or something but I don't think this was their ideal end state for Tailwind.

Demo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szW7N_7B3tU

Same happened to me (with my very different prompt).

I believe most anti-Flock folks are making a strategic error by focusing attention on these abuses. It allows them to merely roll out improvements that prevent this type of thing, while ignoring the more fundamental privacy issues at stake with the intended uses.

Related: Pneumatic tube trash collection, in places like Roosevelt Island in NY

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_vacuum_collection

I've always dreamed of a pneumatic tube burrito delivery system that went straight to my house.

It's open source

I think tstrimple incorrectly thought it was a rhetorical question really meant to complain.

But my interpretation was like yours, that it was good faith and a literal question.

Seems to have been developed in 2008 (continuing through 2017), which explains the "economical" framing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Academy_of_Engineerin...

This is just if you don't want to host it yourself, no?