NinjaTrance

Just as curiosity, how long does it take to set the environment up and running?

Is it viable to start/stop it multiple times per day?

To give a bit more of context, here is a small subset of the new instructions:

  - SOUND PRELOAD
  - SOUND INFO
  - SOUNDGROUP
  - SOUNDNAME$
  - SOUNDAVAILABLE

  - LOADWAV
  - PLAYWAV
  - STOPWAV
  - WAITWAV
  - PAUSEWAV
  - RESUMEWAV
  - WAVCTL
  - DELWAV
  - WAVACTIVE
  - WAVPLAYING
  - WAVSTATE
  - WAVPOS
  - WAVLENGTH
  - WAVLOADED
  - WAVSLOT
  - WAVCHANNEL

  - LOADMID
  - PLAYMID
  - STOPMID, WAITMID, DELMID, etc.

What a terribly designed language.

If that was the future of the language, I'm glad BASIC is dead.

They changed their name to "Meta" after the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

Some questions to the author, if he reads HN:

> Nvidia is literally paying for datacenter construction, which means paying other companies to buy their chips.

Does Nvidia pay more than it receives from datacenter construction?

> A great website to bookmark and keep an eye on is: isaiprofitable. At the bottom, you’ll see that Nvidia (selling pans, shovels, and blue jeans) is the only company making money.

Have you considered that:

1) There are many other companies making a lot of money? Examples: NVIDIA, Micron, TSMC, Broadcom, AMD, SK Hynix, ASML...

2) The hyperscalers (Google, Microsoft, Amazon) are profitable?

Article was posted on July 4th, 2023.

LLMs may not think, but they do reason.

I say that because the word "reason" originates from the Latin word "ratio," which means "calculation".

LLMs do calculations to produce their answers -- thus, they reason.

If 1 person of AI will be able to replace 5-10, we can expect a replacement of 80-90%.

But I don't see why it couldn't replace thousands, with design/content factories.

So it could be 99-99.9% (leaving all the money for the top 0.1%).

> I'm not sure about coders but for artists I don't think a massive number were making anime waifus, but instead were making graphic designs for advertisements, publications & websites.

There was an old joke among designers that their biggest competitor was the boss' nephew playing with photoshop.

Now they need to compete with the boss' nephew playing with AI.

Using a tool where you only fill the blanks in some generic templates made by other humans sounds awfully a lot like what AI already does...

Technically, AI can introduce rounds of fact-checking, proofreading, etc.

But even without that, AI-generated text is already better than what most humans can write -- particularly when they need something fast, cheap and good.

(It might not be "excellent" -- but humans wouldn't be able to make it fast and cheap...)

Would someone who's "trying to get started in design" be able to make anything as good as these AI posters? And how would they survive in a world where machines can do their job for free?

I suppose human artists will continue to exist, but they will be like chess players: they will continue to exist simply because they love art, but they won't be able to compete with AI.

ETA: less than 2 years.

Students in a graphic design class are expected to create something that graphic designers like; but that's not the same as what other people like.

Wait 6 months...

Suppose you have a budget of $20.

Do you think you will find good artists working for that fee?

I don't think so, unless they are working to prove a point -- that humans can be as good as AI.

And that's the problem:

Humans can be as good as AI, but they are much more expensive.

AI slop.

"Write short paragraphs with simple words, use bullet lists when appropriate."

> AIs are not conscious. They do not feel, experience, or suffer. They do not have innate preferences or underlying motivations.

That should be pretty obvious to anyone who ever created a chatbot using the top LLM APIs:

You can send the same question 1 million times to the same API, and it won't get tired from answering it. But if you simulate a conversation where the same question is repeated 10 times, it will auto-complete the text in a way that seems human. However: you can manipulate it by changing the conversation history; you can reset, roll back and branch the conversation at any point.

Yes, the search in Finder is better than in Windows.

But the UI is worse.

> Each and every comment that is in agreement here is a bunch of former Windows users who wanted to move Explorer to Mac with them

Linux users also agree that Finder sucks.

> Finder was extensively reworked in 2001 from the file manager in NeXT to be much closer to the original Finder, and most of the complaints here are about UI decisions taken from the original Finder, released in 1984.

Why would they ignore all the lessons learned between 1984 and 2001?

That's the reason why most people complain about Finder today.

Mac (the hardware) is amazing.

MacOS (the OS) is much better than Windows.

But MacOS (the user interface) is worse than Windows (or even Linux).

I hate MacOS UI.

Red/yellow/green buttons to close(?)/minimize(?)/maximize(?) windows are usability hell.

> As a Mac user since the 1980s, I feel feel like Finder is easily best in class

Once internal muscle memory is established, the usability problems can be easily dismissed; but for the rest of us, who got used to better file managers, Finder is atrocious.

As a Windows user in the 90s, Linux user in the 2000s, and Mac user since the 2010s, I dread the moments when I have to use Finder.

Proton should be receiving billions in investments from European companies, just like Anthropic and OpenAI do.

According to the article:

> Australia does order that personal information collected for age verification “must be destroyed once all purposes have been met.”

First observation: if you use social media, your privacy is already decimated.

So the article is not really defending privacy; it's simply defending social media. (Under-16s are an important demographic they don't want to lose).

That said, the article is forced to concede:

> Australia does order that personal information collected for age verification “must be destroyed once all purposes have been met.”

Let's repeat:

Social media MUST DESTROY all personal information collected for age verification.

But let's be honest: if you really value your privacy, you shouldn't be using social media.

Interesting reading.

They are still focusing on "catastrophic risks" related to chemical and biological weapons production; or misaligned models wreaking havoc.

But they are not addressing the elephant in the room:

* Political risks, such as dictators using AI to implement opressive bureaucracy. * Socio-economic risks, such as mass unemployement.

Considering the advances in software and hardware, I would expect that in 2 or 3 years.

And I hope we will eventually reach a point where models become "good enough" for certain tasks, and we won't have to replace them every 6 months.

(That would be similar to the evolution of other technologies like personal computers and smartphones.)

> I use Claude Opus (4.5, 4.6) all the time and catch it making making subtle mistakes, all the time.

Didn't we make subtle mistakes without AI?

Why did we spend so much time debugging and doing code reviews?

> Are you really being more productive (let’s say 3x times more)

At least 2x more productive, and that's huge.