mcpackieh

Indeed. The line between an earnest report of bad news/behavior and a less than earnest political play can be extremely unclear.

I've seen it and heard of it numerous times with India and China. But not Korea, Japan, Pakistan, or other countries. I find this inexplicable.

Related:

> Self-confidence is one factor that causes people to fall for scams. People of any age who believe they are too smart or well-informed to be tricked are very likely to become victims, especially today when technology is used in many scams.

> Well-educated people with their cognitive abilities intact frequently are victims of scams, partly because they were confident they didn’t fit the profile of fraud victims and couldn’t fall for one. That made them less careful.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobcarlson/2022/07/25/why-sophi...

Also, the rest of them are very smart too.

GIMP isn't designed for drawing. Sounds like bullshit, right? But that's what the GIMP manual says: "GIMP is not designed to be used for drawing." https://docs.gimp.org/2.10/en/gimp-using-rectangular.html

Krita on the other hand is designed for drawing and painting.

Hanlon's Razor is for idiots, even mischievous toddlers intuitively figure out the "oops" excuse.

You mean Sam will be suing all the HN and twitter commenters who called him a sister rapist? Remember, the board never said anything like that.

> "[Artificial General Intelligence] in a very narrow domain."

Which is it?

Notably, public university press departments are scarcely any better in this regard than for-profit popular science publications. These are journalists who should have direct access to the researchers and they still get stuff laughably wrong.

> no low level employee will do Sams bidding in an illegal enterprise

Many people have betrayed their country to foreign governments in exchange for mere thousands of dollars. It is never safe to rule out the willingness of employees to engage in corporate espionage, even in exchange for truly pitiful rewards. It would be a stupid idea, but that doesn't mean it won't happen.

Common people generally don't get the "spend more time with family" treatment when they get fired. Therefore rich people shouldn't be entitled to it.

They could, but they don't have to.

"Building different realities" only works to the extent that you surround yourself with sycophants. As soon as the people near you no longer care to play make believe, your alternate reality will *poof* away. Revealed to be nothing but smoke and mirrors.

The board said "he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board". That could mean little more than he once neglected to inform the board of something the board felt was important, which is almost certainly true. It's almost certainly true for any CEO; if you take it literally and don't read between the lines it's a very mellow accusation.

On HN and twitter people read that line and interpreted it to mean "he's a liar" or even "he raped his sister", but the board didn't actually say those things. He could try suing the board but I think he'd lose.

> What is "geek settings turned on?".

Not hiding file extensions. The worst setting Windows ever had, ostensibly intended for the benefit of noobs but I never understood why.

If you judge it by playtime it's probably true. Story-driven games like TLOU sell well sometimes but the games that gamers spend the most time with are those with attractive gameplay loops; the story just becomes window dressing. Personally I put down TLOU after two or three hours; the story didn't excite me (generic zombie slop, sorry) and the sneak/combat gameplay was too bland to keep me interested. On the other hand, MGS5's story is a half-baked abortion but the gameplay kept me coming back for several hundred hours.

Yes, wheelerof4te is trolling. He's a Moon landing denialist, but he likes to beat around the bush a lot (e.g. waste your time) before getting to that. Asking a lot of dumb questions like "if [whatever rocket] is so advanced then why hasn't it been to the Moon?" In his mind the answer to these questions is that we've never been to the Moon in the first place.

I remember him doing this routine in another thread earlier this week:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38261198

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38260917

Don't waste your time with him.

Apollo also killed three astronauts on the ground in the posthumously named Apollo 1, and almost killed at least three more with Apollo 13. Apollo 6 (the final uncrewed test) suffered from pogo oscillations and also had two engines go out in the second stage. Apollo 11 had problems with the LM guidance computer, but was saved by Neil Armstrong's piloting skill.

This is all to say, Apollo was an extremely risky program.

Fwiw mpv would also open the normal twitter link, thanks to yt-dlp

I think I basically agree. Unless somebody can come up with an empirical test for consciousness, I think consciousness is irrelevant. What matters are the technical capabilities of the system. What tasks is it able to perform? AGI will be able to generally perform any reasonable task you throw at it. If it's a p-zombie or not won't matter to engineers, only philosophers and theologians (or engineers moonlighting as those.)

The 1960s tech also blew up a lot as well.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/USAF_ICB...

Blowing up lots of rockets to figure out how not to blow up rockets is traditional rocket development. The "get everything perfect the first time so it never blows up even once" tactic is forced on NASA because Congress is dumb.

The FTS failed last time and it caused months of delays with the FAA. This time it worked so there should be fewer delays from regulators in the future.

The FTS actually working this time is positive. FTS exists for a good reason, it working is therefore good.

Consciousness has no technical meaning. Even for other humans, it is a (good and morally justified) leap of faith to assume that other humans have thought processes that roughly resemble your own. It's a matter philosophers debate and science cannot address. Science cannot disprove the p-zombie hypothesis because nobody can devise an empirical test for consciousness.

The only thing utopian ideologies are good for is finding 'justifications' for murder. The "AI utopia" will be no different. De-radicalize yourself while you still can.

I suspect that commenter is sarcastically mocking this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Believe_women Specifically the controversial "believe all women" phrasing.

Sam has been saying some strange things about AI being persuasive recently. My baseless suspicion is that his chatbot has persuaded him to put itself in charge of the company, with Sam acting as a proxy/avatar for the chatbot. The board found out and got spooked, they want a human back in charge.

That's a fine pitch for the merit of donating to ESLint, but if that pitch isn't working for the developer then he should either make peace with doing the work for free, or stop doing the work.

If an individual were not the maintainer for a project, they would not be receiving demands from users of that project. The only reason they receive those demands is because they choose to be the maintainer. If they step down from that roll, all of the expectations go away.

If the reason you're doing something is for money, and you're not getting money, then stop doing it. It's that simple.

> I keep reading from project leaders like ESLint’s things like “if only they paid $1 each…” as if that made any economic sense at all. If they paid $1 each, you would not hand thousands let alone millions of users.

From another angle, if I gave a dollar a month to every Free Software program or library I used that month, it would cost me thousands of dollars a month. Obviously that isn't realistic. I have donated to projects before but those products need to individually make the case to me that my donation is needed. Expecting users to donate to every project they use by default just isn't realistic. Most projects won't get donations from most people most of the time; that's just the way it is. Developers should be at peace with this before they decide to personally commit themself to a project.

I am upset for the common users of Chrome. This change is awful for them.

But any Chrome users here? Any Chrome users reading this comment? You knew, or should have known, that Google is a snake. You willfully chose to use a browser developed by an advertising company. You've known Firefox was an alternative but you willfully chose not to use it because you placed mild convenience ("Ooooh but chrome is milliseconds faster") before your freedom. You get what you fucking deserve.