habinero

Most people don't pay their rent with their credit card lol.

People say this all the time and it always makes me wonder what, exactly, were you doing?

That's absolutely not how that works lol. There's a crime/fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege.

Lawyers have a duty of care to the court and they will absolutely drop your ass if you try to make them keep quiet about your crimes.

(This is not to be confused with them representing you in defense. You can tell them about your crimes if the government is trying to get you for said crimes.)

You don't gotta justify yourself. I don't really care why it's slow nor why you made the choices you made. And that's the point I was making: _neither will anyone else_. "It works on my machine" doesn't cut it when people are trying to determine if your stuff is worth the monumental risk.

I saw us-east and assumed it was us-east-1 but it doesn't matter. The same criticism applies to any hosting situation. You _could_ have gone with a cheaper DIY solution but didn't.

Nah, it's not about the brain being special, it's that AI dorks have zero sense of scale.

The brain's a wet jello of 100 billion neurons and a quadrillion synapses plus chemical pathways and feedback loops. It is ridiculously complex, way way way way way more complicated than any LLM. It's all physical processes, sure, but an LLM is not the brain like a pebble is not the sun.

I can point at a laptop and say it's alive because it can see you and hear you and it can _remember_. It has a brain and a heartbeat, even. Oh my god, it can even speak! That's what I hear when people go on about LLMs being alive.

Guys. We mashed together glass and rocks with quantum mechanics. That's cool as shit. You don't gotta pretend it's fucking magic, too.

There's a whollllle lot of not understanding what SaaS actually is going on here.

Software as a Service is a misnomer. It's Getting Rid of Problems as a Service.

Companies have finite time, money and effort to spend on things. You, as the hypothetical SaaS killer, can fart around on Claude for three weeks because your time has no value and if you fail? Eh, what else is new, right?

I just stood up a bunch of SaaS services in my current job because we have problems and I have limited staff to dedicate to those problems. $18/seat/mo for a highly flexible workflow engine with RBAC that integrates with literally everything and I can start using immediately? Sure, sign me up for that Jira subscription.

I don't have to worry about maintaining or monitoring the software or dealing with the server tipping over because the disk filled up or unfucking changes that a junior fueled by hubris and Red Bull thought would work, or building out features when a second group joins in. I can even hire some outside consultant if I need to.

If you're building this sort of thing, I can almost guarantee you're on some cloud service. You could have gone with the ol server-under-a-desk model and it would scale just fine for a long time and it's much much cheaper.

If you didn't go that route, why not? Congrats, you now understand why SaaS is a thing.

If it chugs that badly with one user and zero load, I'm gonna assume it'll tip over if I so much as look at it funny.

SaaS is not the website itself. It's paying for risk management. For example, why did you use AWS instead of the wayyyy cheaper server-under-a-desk? At your scale, I bet it would be more than adequate.

If _you_ don't want to self-host something core to your business, think about why. Congrats, you now understand why people pay for SaaS.

You absolutely cannot vibecode a Jira in two weeks lol, and if you think you can, you don't understand what Jira actually is.

Try it for real. I promise you you'll quickly understand why Jira is what it is. It is absolutely _not_ just a CRUD app.

I'd much rather have immigration than those kinds of people. Making them leave is a net bonus, honestly lol

Nah. Most people get along with others just fine. If you can't, there's something wrong with you.

They can go anywhere they want to. If they can't handle it, they can leave.

And no, we don't negotiate with terrorists. If people try violence, they go to prison. We don't want antisocial people in our society.

There's nothing wrong with the words. People with those beliefs just don't like their opinions accurately described lol. Hit dogs holler and all that.

They are free to move somewhere else. I don't see why you need to coddle that sort.

> Translation from one language into another

Bad example, because translation is deeply creative. You can't blindly mill one language into another, because words and phrases and concepts and cultural references in one language frequently don't map 1:1. You have to find a way to convey meaning as closely as you can and not necessarily the words.

Hah. It probably shouldn't be that surprising? Most engineers learn security on the job, not school. Game devs don't deal with -- and don't need to deal with -- the kinds of security issues Google and the military do.

Google has probably the best security team in the world, and they need to. The military deals with state actors by definition.

Gamedevs need to ship. I'm not saying they don't care about security, but short of some showstopper critical problem, it's not a thing and doesn't need to be.

It doesn't matter if your game is secure if nobody plays it lol

Are you kidding? That's an insane amount of load increase to manage. "Scalability" isn't one thing, especially not at that level, so it's ridiculous to knock them for it. That amount of load ripples across your entire infrastructure.

Someone else quoted a 14x increase in load due to AI hammering github. I wouldn't be at all shocked if that was true, considering how much AI tools are DDOSing the entire internet.

That plus migrating clouds is insanely difficult to manage. They're almost certainly drowning in traffic and trying to keep up.

Now you have two problems lol, in that you don't know if the tests are any good or actually test the thing in question.

Sooner or later you run out of turtles to put on the stack.

Nah. You can succeed in every single individual thing but fail at the overall project because the parts don't align into anything that makes sense.

If you need examples, look at game dev. There's plenty of games that have good execution but aren't fun to play or they're a confusing mess because there wasn't good overall direction.

We don't have sci-fi AI, and in any case "this thing is now possible, therefore [much more difficult thing] will be possible soon" is not a rational thought.

People have been talking about this for literally a hundred years at this point. It's not a thing and isn't gonna be one.

I mean, it is. Textiles are a technology. Extracting usable fiber from plants or animals was something we invented, so is making yarn. Knitting was invented, and shaping cloth to a foot was too. And then there's the modern side of automation. There's a lot of sophistication that goes into it.

The Dispossessed. If you like that one, you'll like the rest of her work.

Not a lawyer, but have friends who are, and the answer is absolutely not lol.

A lot of legal language looks like code, sure. It can be formulaic and full of terms of art ("actual malice" has nothing to do with colloquial malice, for example) but law just isn't code.

Laws themselves are basically human drama run through a compression algorithm. They get written by all kinds of people at all different times for all different reasons. Case law is also law, and that's hundreds of years of people fighting in court lol.

When you hire a lawyer, you're asking them to take all of that and apply it to your hyperspecific set of facts, in such a way that you'd probably win if someone wanted to fight you in court about it.

Also, the stakes in law are high. You usually get one (1) shot at litigating something and that's it. No do overs.

> 2) composition of the workplace will change (more women will elect not to participate)

What? Why on earth would it specifically hit women?

> Going with the possibly-hallucinated AI answer is rational as long as you know the hallucination rate isn't 100%

I hadn't even considered people might evaluate knowledge that way. That's legit horrific lol.

"What's the literal odds this info is wrong" vs "is this answer consistent with everything else I know, and if not, what other info would I need to change my mind"

> is it so surprising that people tend to trust it more

Yes and no.

I think most people would agree that Wikipedia is, on the whole, a pretty great first resource on anything. It tries to be factual and accurate.

Most people would also agree that Wikipedia can be wrong or manipulated and should never be used for an authoritative source.

And then somehow a computer barfing up words distilled from magic internet concentrate is absolutely trustworthy?

I don't get it.

If you ask that, you fundamentally misunderstand the point.

It's not about the LLM, it's about whether people will critically evaluate what it spits out.

And they can get you for theft, etc, if you do. Sometimes the social and legal controls are far more effective.

No, I don't have anything like that. I have a friend with diagnosed OCD and that is an entirely different beast. And I have tried cutting that stuff out (was never big on most of it anyway) and it did absolutely nothing for this sort of thing lol.

Tinnitus really is the best way I can describe it. I didn't even realize how pervasive it was until it shut off.