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

I don't know why you're downvoted, any public wifi access point in a shop could be compromised and users would never notice.

Entirely true, it's not true security, same as changing the ssh port. So, relying on it for any security is not useful but it's a good deterrent from automated scans that are not targeted towards you. Defense in depth means not necessarily discarding flawed defenses if they are in addition to proper defense.

Thanks for the link, checked it and well even side by side on my mbp, the difference is not that super obvious. 30 to 60 fps is very obvious and night and day. 60 fps and 120 fps, I only notice the difference side by side if I pay attention...

But maybe it's because I'm 40+ with relatively bad eye vision and 20 years earlier I'd be noticing the difference much more.. But I'd say going from 1080p to 4k was a lot more obvious than that...


My computer is jailbroken, I have sip disabled yet icloud and imessage work. So what makes my computer different from my phone?

Exactly, until my 20s I enjoyed long games. Now, I have a family, I have other things competing with my time, I want something that is tight with barely any fillers that deliver a good story. My most memorable recent games all delivered on that: Forgotten City (8 hours to finish it completely), Carto, A Juggler's Tale, There Is No Game: Wrong Dimension, ...

While I do enjoy longer games like Yakuza, etc, I really enjoy being able to play through a game in 1 to 2 evenings.


I don't mind longer games at all, even though I juggle dayjob, university, family, and quite time-consuming woodworking hobby at once.

Currently I'm playing through Cyberpunk 2077 and as usually I do almost all side content. I play it for months already, just an hour here and there. I don't mind it at all.

What's important for me the game doesn't waste my time on senseless, boring, repetitive activities. That way, even 30min of playthrough scratches the itch and feels fulfilling.


One doesn't invalidate the other. Yes LLMs have been very successful at solving math problems when guided by mathematicians who know what they're doing. The same is true for emulating a PS5 or (insert cool new project of the week developed with LLM).

On the other hand, when I use LLMs, I regularly see them confidently claim information confidently that is false. So, I'd say productivity gains are true but there's also a cost of wrong information being used to make decisions due to AI.


> On the other hand, when I use LLMs, I regularly see them confidently claim information confidently that is false

When talk to people, I regularly see them confidently claim information that is false as well.

This is not the point where LLMs become useless. LLMs become useless when we understand that we are social creatures and that many times the road is more important than the destination. Also, when you provide instant-travel to all the destinations, the destinations lose their value as well.


> Also, when you provide instant-travel to all the destinations, the destinations lose their value as well.

As any seasoned gamer can confirm. Sometimes there's something lost in that convenience


I think a lot of the problems or gains attributed to AI are just reflections of the humans that use them.

I dont care if you used AI to produce something. If you share it with me, I assume you are responsible for it. You own it, whether you agree or not.

> it's causing people to be confident in information which is false, it's enabling people to treat each other like jerks in even more ways than before

What is the direction of causality here? Does AI make people jerks, or they were already or prone to be jerks?

The same applies to innovations or breakthroughs made by people who use AI in their work.

> LLMs are solving novel math problems and successfully emulated a PS5

Did the AI independently accomplish those things, or did highly competent people accomplish them using AI as a tool?

What would happen if you give someone with no mathematical or programming background the same frontier models that OpenAI used for their mathematical proofs [1]. Would they produce the same discoveries?

I think of humans as constants. They can bring positive, or negative value to the table. The AI is the multiplier.

Take software engineering. If you let someone who doesnt care about code quality (their constant is negative since any code they write will introduce a tech debt) push code to your repo using AI, it will destroy your project. But let an engineer with strong fundamentals and high standards use AI to push code to your repo, they can improve the project much faster than they could without AI.

[1] https://github.com/openai/math/


I guess my comment was done a bit too quickly and comes across as muddled. I mostly agree with you, in the hand of competent people AI is a very powerful tool. I'm a bit of a misanthrope and I think that incompetent, stupid and malicious people vastly outnumber competent, well-intentioned people. This leads me to feel rather pessimistic about the impact of AI because it is a multiplier when the human constant is often less than great.

In a lot of big companies, you had a small majority of people who were incompetent but mostly harmless because their lack of competence prevented them from causing too many issues and another group of people who were competent and productive. Nowadays, with AI those incompetent people can be maximally effective at causing issues due to their incompetence.

The same happens with opensource projects who are now flooded with mostly useless PRs and bug reports from incompetent people directing LLMs to do so. etc...

So yes individually AI makes people productive but I'm not sure if that is true at the scale of a company nor do I think it's necessarily true with opensource projects.


I agree the population distribution is skewed towards negative and average is less than 0. And when those people use AI it gets even worse because they are preventing themselves to become competent by relying on AI and skipping fundamentals.

Unfortunately the things we can control regarding other people are limited... So I think least we can do is to either surround ourselves with competent people or if not possible, ignore the AI and hold people accountable based on their final output. I often see people try to defend themselves by just blaming AI when their final output is bad but when its good its their work. But its not an AI problem, its the people problem sadly. I wish the problem was AI btw, it would be much easier to fix.


I disagree with the premise that you need to know what you’re doing to solve problems or create something new with LLMs (unfortunately).

I wouldn’t say that Dans recent work in maths was necessarily that of an expert. More of a fan of Lean than anything and he did a breakthrough in a relatively short time period.

https://overreacted.io/how-i-vibed-a-proof-of-conways-conjec...

It seems to me it’s about enough money, knowledge, and effort to want to achieve a thing. Which is good, but can and is being weaponized in terrible ways against us.


I like the definition of extrovert and introvert that says that extroverts are regain their energy by being in group whereas introverts regains there by being alone. According to that, I'm an introvert, I need my alone time so that I can recenter myself and recover my energy. I do feel drained when being in events with a lot of people.

But, that doesn't stop the fact that I do like people, I like organizing parties (or rather I don't particularly like the organizing but I like the result of having organized parties and having close friends) at my place and regularly invite friends. It's just that after that I'm exhausted and I need some alone time to recover. So being an introvert doesn't imply that you shouldn't make effort to reach out to people or that you won't enjoy being with others. It just means that having some alone time is necessary to recover.


> I like the definition of extrovert and introvert that says that extroverts are regain their energy by being in group whereas introverts regains there by being alone.

That's the Big 5 meaning, which has some scientific backing. The other one that basically just means social/shy comes from Myers-Briggs, which while popular isn't based on anything and is pretty much just pseudoscience.


I hated Moana 2 but I didn't know about the context. Thanks for that, that now explains it. It's a pity because I much prefer Moana to Frozen but I have no plans to show my kid Moana 2.


Well worth playing the remastered version. It makes the control a bit more bearable but otherwise feels like the original.


Yes, co-fermented coffee tends to be lower quality coffee that is co-fermented with flavouring juice to cover the lack of quality. That's not the case of all co-ferments but it's a significant enough number of them that it's usually something to avoid unless you really trust the roaster and farm.


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

Search: