_vertigo
_vertigo on Hacker News
How do things get fixed if not by litigation?
I considered that but I also considered that I don’t come close to maxing a normal $20 a month Claude pro plan. So I think “incredible waste” is probably too far.
I also see total garbage slop upvoted on this site every day. At least with this, I am experimenting and learning a little about how to use agents effectively, I’m not sure I can say the same happened for other slop on this site.
I started playing the rs-sdk (
https://github.com/MaxBittker/rs-sdk) with Claude after seeing it on HN the other day. I haven't looked at the Minecraft experiment but just letting an agent loose in the game and telling it to play did not work well. At first it really did not have a good feel for how the game actually plays and would routinely waste tons of time doing something that makes no sense — very reminiscent of the "four agents spent 11 minutes appointing a ‘sole fertilizer operator’ for a single piece of bone meal on a single wheat block" anecdote in this article.
But, after several hours of correcting and directing Claude (build modular, re-usable snippets of useful code rather than one-off scripts for driving, document your learnings for future agents, etc., explicit guidance on playing more optimally) it can now play the game fully on its own. I just gave it a goal to play through the end of the "Legends quest" (nearing end game content, requires playing through lots of complex quests ) and it's breezing through it.
I haven't experimented with swarms of agents yet, but I know if I had tried to create a swarm in 2004scape before the agent was actually good at playing the game, it would have failed horribly. So, I wonder how good the agents they were experimenting with are at Minecraft when playing alone.
How banal. The first action after achieving "AGI" is not taking over the world, curing cancer, or anything fantastic like that, but rather "lowering operating expenditure"..
Leaving your “math is for humans” take alone, if the purpose of math is to “gain a precise and clear understanding of the world”, why is clarifying results a contemptible way to spend time?
“It’s easy to destroy a building than to build one” is still true, building codes or not.
This is one of the most exhausting (and frankly, exhausted) recurring arguments that comes up over and over again on HN.
Some bit of open source software does something bad or unwanted which causes people point out that it shouldn't do that bad thing. In this case, not even "the authors of this software should be held liable for the software doing the bad thing", just, "Hey, the right thing to do would be to update the software to not do the bad thing."
Why does this always lead a zillion people to come out of the woodwork to point at licenses and warnings or whatever? Like, yes, there's a warning. Your software having a warning doesn't mean people can't criticize you and your software for doing bad thing. Your software license does not give you immunity from criticism or from people saying you should change your software.
No, you don't have to change the software. Yes, other people are within their rights to fork the software themselves. But they can also point out that they told you that your software was doing the bad thing and you didn't fix it or change it, and that as a result they don't like you or your software or both — whatever. Nothing at all wrong with that.
Is there specific legal guidance about whether doing this in a training run is against the law? It seems like your link is for commercial / for-hire investigative work.
Clearly not Claude-speak, see the rest of the message. "Rollout artifact" just means "an artifact of how we rolled this change out" which maybe isn't proper English but the message was obviously not written by Claude. Upgrade your Claudish detection
Try reading the article before commenting
> Make it so the model can't misbehave.
How do you figure? I haven't met anyone who thinks that's possible. It seems clear to me that it is not possible.
That's a good yardstick. Would a reasonable human driver call (or want to call) the cops? If yes, it's reasonable for Waymo to do the same
No, it's like making a snow report for a handful of skiing areas in a small geographical area (e.g. Sierras) and then contextualizing it against the snow report for all skiing areas in the broader region (e.g. Western US).
What is your point? It’s not that complicated. Obvious slop is obvious. Maybe there are some humans out there who sound like Claude but I’m not going to force myself through 900 slop blog posts on the off chance that one of them might actually be written by a human.
Maybe some people stop reading LLM slop purely because it violates their moral principles or whatever but most people bail out because slop is mentally painful to read. If you are a human and you write like today’s AI find a different writing style, not because reads like AI, but because it reads like shit.
When I clicked “see more reviews” while signed out it prompted me to sign in
YES. A thousand times yes. It's garbage.
This post does not read like LLM output though
The resulting image holds zero power compared to a realistic deepfake. A drawing or a crude photoshop is obviously artificial.
A deepfake can be used to blackmail, ruin someone’s reputation, or deeply unsettle them. The power of an artificial image along those dimensions scales exactly with how convincing it is.
An app that can generate convincing deepfakes quickly, cheaply, and easily is essentially a weapon.
Is this a real take? You don’t see a difference between an app that allows anyone to transform a picture of someone into a convincing nude within seconds with no skill boundary, and MS paint?
Do you think Google should get government sign-off on every change to its routing algorithm?
..you good bro? Anyway, things are improving but that doesn’t mean people can’t have a say in what tradeoffs they are willing to accept in return for progress.
A lot of progress has externalities and the benefits and downsides of progress are rarely equally distributed.
everyone’s seen ads before, mind if I put a giant ad in the sky for everyone to look at?
Not really seeing what this has to do with Meta or data centers. The bacteria was traced back to a contractor, not really clear to me what the link between bacteria and data centers is.
If the story was like, “water was polluted with waste chemicals produced during data center construction,” I think I could see more of a connection.
Great, a totally vibe-coded website with a slop “analysis” about AI touting a meaningless ratio with zero context
Rock climbing ethics is more complicated and dramatic than that.
Applying this logic about easements doesn’t really capture the whole picture, because you’re considering people only, not considering the
mountain. I think some people who support chopping those bolts would argue that this is like restoring the Mona Lisa after some random guy painted their own painting over it. Yes, removing that guy’s crappy painting is technically a destructive act and removes the world’s ability to see that painting. But net-net, things have improved, even though there will always be some signs of the damage done by a fool.
iPhone 13. Did you change the slider at the bottom?
I could see it being good if it helps you estimate crimes committed by citizens. If you know where the gaps in your knowledge/data are, you can attempt to account for them. And that’s better than nothing.
I think misleading information is obviously bad, incomplete information is not necessarily misleading though.
On the other hand, it might be better to remove incomplete information if it is actively being used to mislead people.