clcaev

Perhaps a manifest index/list of training data and learning method should be mandatory for “public” use of any model, sort of like food ingredient package labeling. The list of texts used and any weighting seems important to facilitate a public understanding / debate of model expectations and behavior.

With TARP, the government assumed the commercial risk on behalf of those with substantial pension/401k holdings in banks and industry. These are the donors that lit up their switchboards.

The "consumer welfare standard" and related contestability doctrine is often used to challenge anti-trust action. However, requiring consumer harm neglects the loss of economic opportunity for providers (eg stores and gig workers).

If contestabilty, not marketshare, is the appropriate test of economic power, then laws may be needed to increase contestability, such as "data portability" rules for store owners so they don't have to key-in product description, availability, and pricing multiple times.

In your example of a new delivery platform entrant who bootstraps using its direct competitor, what legal framework protects that startup? This seems another contestability consideration.

From a marketshare perspective, it meets test of a monopoly in many localities. There is a "network effect" moat: the app is a storefront, payment gateway, and delivery network. The merger eliminates platform contention, giving customers perhaps greater choice of retailer but foreclosing the next largest platform alternative.

Their platform scopes and coordinates a market. They even recognize this in their announcement: "DoorDash and Instacart believe that communities benefit when Main Street competes"

Could we have more discussion of our current legal/business environment, specifically, the economic opportunities it affords/constrains?

If this merger is approved via consumer welfare standard, should it be contingent upon some constraints? For example, should DoorDash be restricted from participating in the market it coordinates? If it’s a near monopoly in some regions, how will price be controlled without market pressure?

Historically, antitrust action also considers economic opportunity: Bell/AT&T licensed Unix source code for a nominal fee, largely because the 1956 consent decree restricted Bell/AT&T from selling products outside telecommunications.

> Weights aren't IP so the licenses are bunk.

This is not yet a given, I expect rule-making or copyright law expansion if courts rule otherwise.

Things also change. In the 80s lawyers carefully suggested white pages phone listings came under copyright but "sweat of the brow" was rejected by US supreme court in Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991)

This was also a "double tap" some 2h later, after rescue crews arrived.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Minab_school_attack

Dr. Pillay also chaired the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory from 2021 to 2025.

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2026/pillay/facts/

The burden of proof seems backwards; how about we maintain list of approved safe materials and their threasholds.

Thank you. This seems a good start to a desperately needed credible "externalities report" to ground political and economic discussion.

The flood of anecdotal thumping seems to distract and undermine deliberation. The sad lack of peer reviewed data and impact analysis hinders thoughtful policymaking.

This document, "Writing Without Artificial Intelligence: Supporting Foundational Knowledge, Critical Thinking, and Independence of Mind" discusses classroom use of AI and was produced by the "Artificial Intelligence and Education Committee" at The University of Chicago. It contrasts with MIT's report, discussed last month, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49464314

Among other things, it recommends "Computerized, asynchronous testing facilities for the proctoring of fair and thorough assessments of student learning in an AI-free environment."

Elinor Ostrom's Governing the Commons

Ostrom summarizes her empirical investigations of common pool resources (fisheries, forests, ground water, etc.) and how stakeholders can collectively govern them, a polycentric approach that is neither governmental nor proprietary. She abstracts 8 principles of governance, elements of successful community based resource governance.

Alvin Roth's Who Gets What — and Why: Matchmaking, Mismatch, and Market Design

Roth discusses market failures and how one builds market coordination organizations to perform matchmaking. He focuses on non-monetary markets such as paired kidney exchange, which he pioneered. Another example is medical residency matching.

Unfortunately, objective... independently verifiable information is not something we could confidently say is standard practice in China.

What are the free software alternative phones/tablets and how do we concentrate our support so at least one of them is successful?

What is the core value proposition of twitter? It seems simple, short form informations delivery (eg “follow me on twitter”) is central. The “likes”, retweets, and follower counts are secondary but perhaps important metrics that drive engagement. A simple link plus QR for paper is needed. Moderation seems a challenge. Are there simpler alternatives to mastodon? is federation possible? Why is RSS not used for this?

Clearly they approve or they'd at least stop advertising their twitter handles on their websites and handouts. Most brands cannot ignore such a vast network effects and have made the decision to continue despite the changes.

How is product liability relevant here? If an AI company makes a model available, someone uses it, and it does something bad, who is at fault? The user, the data center, or the one who made the model?

If we want open weight models with a warranty disclaimer, then the user would be held liable. If we want to hold AI companies at least partially liable, that seems a different, centralized model.

The 1:2 match scheme is helpful for a foundation to (a) accept large gift and (b) meet 501c3 1/3rd "public support" requirements.

To keep favorable charity taxation status, a large donation can only be accepted if there are sufficient small donors who also contribute. It's complex and indirect, but the matching is quite real as a $100 contribution from a small donor enables the charity to accept a corresponding amount from large donor pledges.

TIPS is moving from login.gov to id.me -- a private company being the identity authority for government services.

Some may express societal challenges in ways that inappropriately and wrongly infer intentionality. We can acknowledge their point while strongly disagreeing with their characterization.

There are significant societal impacts of this AI buildout. Some are concerned externalities weigh more heavily on the poor and marginalized. I think state wide data center holds are part of this civil discourse.

I'd prefer we have more conservative pollution standards along with a reasonable tax on AI use that helps mitigate externalities. That's hard. Reasonable people can have fierce disagreements on what market interventions are indicated, and how extensive they should be.

> Should this part of society be top-down planned or should it be market organized?

To have a market, some organization needs to administer it. PJM operates transmission and facilitates a regional wholesale electric market.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PJM_Interconnection

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional_transmission_organiza...

> 'Help me but don't patronize' is a tall order without some real linguistic gymnastics.

Not at all. Just don't start by guessing what a disabled person's concerns are, or presume that an unsolicited suggestion is helpful. A respectful start is letting them know you will be responsive and let them lead the conversation.

Of the 3 proposals, the 2nd/B seems to be more of an “informed consent” model while the other two are seeking a comprehensive exclusion. I hope earnest dialogue and driving to a broad consensus among significant contributors is forthcoming.

Notable are the endorsements, which are balanced over all three options, perhaps indicating only 1/3 are supportive of a more permissive position. If this represents core contributors, this could be worrisome: a clear majority favoring a exclusion, but yet a sizable portion of contributors who don’t want a ban. Losing 1/3 of core contributors would be a significant loss to the project.

LLM or not, I absolutely hate the "not X but Y" writing pattern

PhD programs are generally not funded with loans. Professional schools are.

I would rather we align incentives of universities and make them a co-signer on the loan.

Perhaps annually, if the student falls behind on payments and their income is below a given threshold (degree specific, eg truth in advertising?) then the university who credentialed them gets to make up the installment difference for that tax year.

The recent policy is also setting loan limits for graduate studies: https://www.npr.org/2026/07/01/nx-s1-5876467/student-loans-d...

It's a great demonstration of how public health communication fails: the most important part is at the tail of the article, below two advertisements, and it's about as obscure as one could write it:

Any direct human contact with a bat is an indication for rabies postexposure prophylaxi - medical treatment given immediately after potential exposure to a rabid animal.