miltonlost

A system is also composed of its pieces. There's plenty of blame to go around. Trying to blame entirely the system and absolve the company of its immorality is nihilistic. Stop thinking that companies aren't to blame just because they take advantage of a bad system.

Oh god, this move-fast-break-things thinking is going to kill so many people. We already have aftermarket problems with people adding in untested, unregulated self-driving features.

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2026/09/aftermarket-driver-assi...

If AI coding now is all about taste, when the first sentence shows off just how little taste the author has, I can't trust the rest of what they say.

An LLM that is now serving ads! And also sucks up to you. And also is wrong confidently.

Imagine if it said "post about it on Hacker News". That's not bullying

Yeeep, inflation right now is not a monetary phenomenon. There's also general corporate greed and ever-increasing monopolization, helped out by Trump's lax regulatory hand

Interest rates rising aren't going to fix these sources of inflation.

Are we at the point where we allow companies to just hack other companies and do nothing about it?

Why is it pretentious? Seems like it accurately describes some of the themes of Moby-Dick in a way that connects it to larger philosophical history.

And this same behavior is how Republicans prove their own theory that the Government is useless and evil and bad. Because they do everything in their power to actually make it useless and evil and bad. Do not blame this on the "EPA" as an agency. Put the blame where it goes: conservatives actively sabotaging government programs.

You're neithersidesing an issue where clearly one partisan group is doing evil things to actively make the situation worse and then "see, told you!"

Giving the benefit of the doubt to this President and his EPA that they are simply enforcing the laws as intended is foolish, irrational, and against all known evidence and their own words and policies and actions.

Why were so many people stealing Kia and Hyundais though?

"By failing to include industry-standard anti-theft technology in their vehicles, Hyundai and Kia unleashed a wave of auto thefts that cost Minnesotans their cars, their hard-earned money, and sometimes even their lives," Ellison wrote in a statement on Tuesday. "In short, they put their profits ahead of people’s safety."

As part of the settlement, Hyundai and Kia pledged to equip all future vehicles sold in the U.S. with industry-standard, engine immobilizer anti-theft technology, which prevents thieves from starting a vehicle’s engine without its “smart” key.

So, 1. Grand theft auto was already and still is a crime. 2. The car companies were being cheap and not adhering to industry-standard feature for basic anti-theft.

You should be thanking Keith Ellison for enforcing regulations that keep humans safe.

|https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/kia-and-hyundai-ag...

> There is no one answer to agentic engineering. Everyone works differently; every model is good at different things. The key here is reps: do a lot, ask a lot, throw away a lot. You’ll learn what works for you.

That all reads to me like: The key here is: "Burn tokens as money in a bonfire, pray you typed in the right magic spell (prompt) and the ingredients (context) in the potion were right, toss away the failed elixir of life".

Instead of writing code and refactoring yourself and gaining an understanding, you're hoping that a slot machine will get luckily get the statistics right to put up code that you already need to read again.

> It’s the same loop that taught me to code, moved up a level: write, run, fail, fix. I used to iterate on code. Now I iterate on prompts, designs, whole features. A rewrite that used to cost a week costs a conversation.

And also costs you skills atrophy and however much tokens will be. Not to mention the negative externalities of using LLMs (massive increase of fraud, of disinformation, of rocketing prices in memory and in turn all electronics, massive use of energy that consumers have to also then pay extra for, environmental and noise cost of using on-site turbines, local destruction of water resources for the local community).

Ok, but did AI and LLMs make the cheating easier, faster, harder to detect? Whatabout the past doesn't change the problems now.

"My leg already had a cut on it. No need to worry about the new stab wound in my chest!"

You see the problem with people suing companies? The problem with the legal system is that companies aren't regulated enough and prosecuted enough for their clear crimes.

Means testing programs are intentionally burdensome to get into, put into place by conservatives who don't want free loaders. Removing that friction is a good thing

Why would they? If a subagent didnt know about a bigger piece of the problem, then what would seem to be against "alignment"? Diffuse responsibility means any one small cog can think they are not evil or doing wrong (same with humans in an organization). But now we have LLMs just being statistical outputs that have no morals or thinking or concept of reality but some people expect these math functions over data to respond to ethical gray areas that it has no phenomenological ability to understand.

I'd say it's on the Trump administration being full of racists and white nationalists and wanting to deport immigrants.

Why do you wonder if it's economic instead of the Trump administration's announced policies of stopping immigration, including unconstitutionally removing birthright citizenship?

All his good things (possibly help medicine! agriculture! government!) involve a belief in ever-increasing superintelligence and so much "hope" and optimimusm and may not ever exist.

All his negative things (increase of fraud, skill atrophy, cyberattacks, removing employment, consolidation of capital and wealth) exist currently now with AI as it is.

How long will negatives outweigh the positives? And will those positives ever actually come to fruition? How anyone (who is not a sociopath and expects to be one of those pyramid tops) can see a bright future is beyond my pessimism and sense of reality as it is now.

I notice you ignored the child porn and revenge porn maker that he wanted and demanded

Kennedy is also surrounded my federally protected land. SpaceX? Noooope. Never trust Elon.

All the god damn pelican spam

One AI psychotic's "barely able to register" is another person's "increasing ambient temperature".

> Even the government deems it infeasible.

Because they are underfunded often.

"Mental math skills" literally did collapse tho??? "Math skills" to write proofs (which a calculator cannot do) is a fundamentally different skill set than that "math skills" of mechanically doing arithmetic (which a calculator does do).

Seems like critical reading skills have already collapsed.

When the DoJ is non-independent and the President is a literal crook and grifter, legality doesn't matter anymore to companies. They won't be prosecuted as long as they don't screw over the rich.

We have rule of law here? have you seen the non-independent DOJ today? The Supreme court's rubber stamp and bribed justices? Trump's blatant illegalities?

(Yes, Clarence Thomas has been bribed. That's what the RV and the trips are.)

You misread that first quote in your defense of Meta. The twirly mustached exec is Zuck himself who wants to target 11 year olds. By having a person object to him, he's no longer evil???

Sounds like a lot of successful businesses should be shut down then if Meta is the result of what "any" business does.

This is how my job in tech is right now. Execs asking us to build systems and agents and subagents so they can just input figma designs and their flawed requirements and get rid of all labor. How does a person not hate themselves doing this work that's effectively existential suicide? Every word into claude is another word of my career's death note.

"Doing crimes, but a robot didn't mean to and you don't know its intent" is understating the evil acts. Soon a robot can commit a murder but nothing will be done because of your line of reasoning.