pesus

Getting Claude Code is the opposite of writing your own apps.

I see praise on Reddit (by GME stockholders, of course) saying that this makes him appear like some tough rebel standing up against the evil mainstream media... but I'm really not seeing it. To me it seems like a very tired (inebriated?) guy in a leather jacket who can't comprehend or answer a very basic question. Is this what passes for being a good CEO these days? I'd expect them to be able to at least come up with a vague response instead of claiming they can't comprehend that one number is bigger than the other.

It was my first thought when I saw the name, unfortunately. The US constitutes a large portion of this site's user base. Whether the association sticks around is yet to be seen.

It's it anything like the comments I see on here defending Flock, it'll just be a bunch of attempting to scare people with the idea of crime, and disparaging anyone in favor of privacy as being pro-crime.

The way so many people on HN and elsewhere don't value art at all is pretty depressing. I don't know if it's a side effect of lack of exposure to art and the humanities growing up or something else, but I can't imagine living that way. What a dull experience life would be without art.

How many jobs are created? And how many jobs were also lost because of AI? A few jobs created vs thousands or more lost isn't a positive.

I don't find it weird, it's about what I'd expect from AI sycophants. They don't seem to realize that it comes off as not even being able to defend their own ideas.

> Of course AI is going to be a rising tide but there will be a blip where people can lose jobs.

Can you provide any evidence for the supposed rising tide? So far I've seen nothing that indicates that anyone besides the people directly invested in AI companies will benefit from it. Even the best case scenario right now - software developers becoming more productive - doesn't actually benefit anyone not invested in AI companies.

People losing their jobs (and in many cases, their livelihoods/lives as a result) are also not the only negative effects.

Ignoring the fact that it's absolutely unhinged and bonkers to include that in the first place, I don't even understand how they could possibly ever get any information about that. Are they using LLMs to generate these policies without review? Or are there really lawyers out there who thought this was pertinent and important to include?

There's no terminal that's going to make getting on a flight as simple or quick as getting on a bus.

You mean you can't do much about it that wouldn't cost your job.

Google still shows Theresa T as the name when you search.

It's already becoming a trend amongst the youngsters, though I can't say how widespread it is. I think it's inevitable and long overdue.

I took one back in 2018 or so, and I assume it's still a degree requirement. If most are like the one I took, however, very few people seriously engaged with the class, and it's just viewed as a filler class.

It didn't help that the workload was a joke. I believe the entirety of our assignments were 5 single page "essay" responses to some ethical scenarios, and the professor seemed to hand out As just for writing enough. It probably took me less than 2 hours of total writing. I imagine most of the students these days are just having ChatGPT write it for them. We absolutely need to take ethics more seriously though, even if it involves adding more/more rigorous courses to the curriculum.

By this logic, anyone "begging the government" to prevent anything harmful is bootlicking.

Personally, I think bootlicking more accurately describes wanting to allow the billionaires in control of the country unlimited ability to build data centers to help destroy the fabric of society and spy, stalk, disappear and murder people with impunity.

I'm not seeing how it takes more than 5 minutes to type up an itinerary. If you want to make it cute and silly, just change up the font and color and add some clip art.

If this is the best use case that exists for AI image generation, I'm only further convinced the tech is at best largely useless.

Yeah, it's not "democratization", people were just too lazy to do it before. It only takes some basic effort and a little bit of time to be able to create decent versions of those things.

He's getting downvoted because none of these supposed "benefits" outweigh the costs.

Nothing says benefiting society like increasing unemployment, destroying what little trust was left in society, and allowing for CSAM and racist propaganda to be generated en masse. At least some corporations will save a few bucks.

How do these justify the costs to society?

Billboard company puts up billboards saying "don't hire humans".

HN comments: "I just don't understand why people hate AI".

Maybe useful for ensuring their reputation gets tarnished.

If I had to guess, I'd say that it's actually more of a young person thing to want to get rid of all AI. I've only ever seen older people wearing a shirt with an AI generated image on it.

I would absolutely push that button a thousand times as well.

I'm really not seeing how you can do PhD level work as an undergrad. You wouldn't have the foundational knowledge necessary to do PhD level work, and you have no idea how much of what you're learning is accurate.

Maybe I'm just too American to understand, but it still baffles me that WhatsApp is used for business purposes. It makes a lot more sense for regular personal messaging, but it seems incredibly unprofessional to me. I would think it bizarre and a bit invasive if my boss tried to text or iMessage me. Are they at least using different accounts for work messaging?

Not to mention the app itself was pretty mediocre last time I used it, but that's neither here nor there...

At this point, I'd assume those hiring managers are also being forced to use AI in their jobs (or pretend, at least) and probably wouldn't read too much into it if it's not a substantial portion of their resume. I do feel the same way, though.

There is nothing in the constitution limiting the 1st amendment to only citizens.

Have you run into any serious complications doing that? I'm a bit worried that I've used my google account for so long and for many things that I might accidentally lock myself out of something important without it.

Wow, the other comments weren't exaggerating. This is really bad. If my tax returns or other data were part of this, I might consider legal action.

I wonder if somewhere like Wired/Ars Technica/404media might pick this up?

I almost solely use HN on my iPhone browser. It works very well and the scaling is well implemented, although it is a little too easy to accidentally fat finger and vote/flag something without realizing it. I actually find the desktop site (on my laptop) to be a bit hard to use due to its narrowness and small font size, but I'm not sure how universal that is.