HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | charcircuit's commentslogin

X's algorithm no longer downranks for using links.

Extraordinary claims should come with extraordinary evidence. Also, as a layman outside their system, how can you verify this?

The owner of the site said so https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2082273378749268440 and it is backed by the open source algorithm they released.

https://github.com/xai-org/x-algorithm


They removed that a while ago.

Do you have data? Because I don't know how to see their algorithm ranking objectively enough to verify.

https://github.com/xai-org/x-algorithm

The algorithm is open source and does not include logic for down ranking external links.


Deepseek does not offer zero data retention. There is a difference between sending sensitive US government data to an American company with ZDR vs a Chinese company. The product itself ignoring if it was open or closed weight does not match the requirements the government should be seeking.

> Deepseek does not offer zero data retention.

I don't believe the ones which say they do. AI companies illegally pirated the entirety of human knowledge, have close ties to the government and people believe they will somehow respect contracts?

Some AI companies are just more honest than others up front.


You do realize deepseek models can be self hosted right?

There is nothing else to see other than the US losing at their own game and panicking


I don’t think that’s fair. IMO I think they’re concerned that there might be precedent for current for future models to do things untoward to the user. Of course there’s no proof of this or anything I think they’re just preparing in a case where Chinese models do extract or harvest data even when self hosted. Given they have an internet connection of course

In that case it wouldn't be a service "developed by Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence Co., Ltd (DeepSeek)".

Again, hosting providers eventually get RCE by being able to send whatever bash commands they want to run on the machine running the agent. It is very important who you give this power to.


> In that case it wouldn't be a service

It definitely is a "product" developed by Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence Co., Ltd (DeepSeek) though


A service is not a product. You are mixing things up.

uh? A model isn't a service either

> Notice of Order Regarding Exclusion and Removal of DeepSeek Products

deepseek 4.1 flash definitely is a product "developed by Hangzhou DeepSeek Artificial Intelligence Co., Ltd (DeepSeek)"

How's that even debatable lmao?


I am talking about an American company selling deepseek inference as a service.

Also since the model is open source you wouldn't need to go through procurement to obtain it anyways.


They're still using a deepseek product, which is explicitly banned

Theres no such thing as ZDR unless you self-host. The companies that claim to offer it have histories that would suggest otherwise and are currently so big and powerful that the government won't do anything to them even if it comes out that they completely lied about it.

UAC is not a security boundary. It is not a permission pop up.

And yes you are in the minority for not wanting permissions to be limited so that a random calculator app is able to steal your credit card information and go on a shopping spree.


Installing an application that advertises your credit card number to the rest of the world probably wasn't a great idea in the first place then.

I don't get what you mean. If you save a credit card number in your browser (or a password, or a cookie) it's available, by default, to any other program running as your user. So a random calculator can easily steal your credit card, passwords, cookies, ssh keys, keepass database, gpg private key, and more.

The compositor is not the ultimate service on the system. Saying that all APIs calls should be sent to the compositor and then the compositor in turn uses some bespoke IPC to communicate with other services is not architecturally sound.

It shouldn't even be possible to seize a domain in the first place. Too often it ends up hurting legitimate actors.

TikTok, Instagram, X, etc. These platforms will host you for free and will distribute updates to people, including potential customers via the algorithm.

Those are no longer useful as a "public square" because of the increasingly walled garden design.

Funny that I can't barely access any of those just because I don't have an account. Plus Facebook. They show me almost nothing and push their shitty app to nausea. And I am sure the "site" owners get zero info on how many clients they are losing for being behind that fence.

Then make an account. Billions of people have already done so. Cloudflare, or AWS, or any other server host also requires an account too.

Pretty sure they're referring to their usage as a potential content consumer, not content creator. You don't need a cloudflare or AWS or any other service account (usually) to be an end user of a site that utilizes those. Increasingly it's hard to view any content on the social media platforms without an account.

I'm not sure just skipping the scraping by providing your data directly for harvesting is the solution

Okay real quick, how do I configure a reverse proxy to my application with TikTok or Instagram?

You might be overthinking what is actually needed for the business.

> TikTok, Instagram, X

Requires login


>(4) Mathematical progress cannot be measured by checking off boxes on a problem list.

Once we've essentially found an algorithm that can solve any math problem we've essentially reached the end of mathematical progress. Checking current solvers against unsolved problems is how we can check if we've reached the goal or not.

Of course humans can still study math, like how we teach people arithmetic, algebra, calculus, etc. But there is no more progress to be had. As a society we can allocate resources elsewhere.


"An algorithm that can solve any math problem", I am not Alan Turing or Kurt Gödel, but this seems impossible.

Metal is universally supported among Apple's product lines.

Just as useful as DirectX being universally supported in Microsoft's product lines.

The point of OpenGL was to have an API universally supported everywhere


> The point of OpenGL was to have an API universally supported everywhere

That was always more like a dream than reality. OpenGL implementations between GPU vendors and platforms all have significant "implementation defined behaviour", interesting bugs and different performance "hot paths". And as soon as you need to start using extensions, portability is out the window anyway. Even setting up a GL context across different operating systems (e.g. the very first thing every GL application needs to do) is a royal PITA unless bringing in additional helper libraries like GLFW or SDL.

Arguably the only actually portable GL flavour is WebGL.


Which never happened, not even on game consoles.

That's a bad analogy

How so?

Both are os-specific graphics apis. It seems pretty comparable to me.


Wrong

Could you explain how?

Gabe Newell put an end to that

So you are saying it's a bad analogy because DirectX has wider compatibility than Metal?

I'm not sure if I would put it exactly like that, but yeah, I am referring to Wine/Proton.

Also, see pjmlp's comments. Everything he said is spot on.


Could you please communicate instead of just replying? I have no idea what you're talking about and would appreciate a fully expressed thought instead of a one liner or a vague 6 word phrase.

No thank you. Good luck out there.

Why is it a bad analogy? I don't have experience on either of the libraries, so I may be missing something.

Thanks to extension spaghetti, there isn't a single OpenGL API, it is like programming for the Web or UNIX flavours, you end up with multiple code paths depending on the extensions available, thus it is like programming against multiple APIs even if it says OpenGL in the box.

Everything is universally supported in a small enough universe.

A 100 Gbps uplink is an average of $0.03 per Mbps per month for transit. So that would be $0.00093, a tenth of a penny for a terabyte. This is not even counting peering agreements that make sending the bandwidth free, or the 95th percentile billing which makes spikes free to handle. Or that bandwidth is only charged 1 way (eg. If most of your bandwidth is sending data to consumers then sending data to your server is free).

https://resources.telegeography.com/ip-transit-price-erosion...


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: