ghjv

Thanks for sharing this essay, can you share the prompt you used to generate it as well?

looks fine on my machine

interested in reading this but the tone is so sour and sneering that I couldn't get through the first section.

It's 100% AI Generated, stick it in Pangram yourself and see.

While reading some of the comments on this thread I felt somewhat troubled at how pessimistic a few users were about having meaningful relationships with other people. Can be easy to feel like what you read on Social Media is representative of the avg human being or society at large.

Always worth keeping in mind on HN but on a thread like this especially, the comments you see are heavily selected for having been written by people who spend significant amounts of their time commenting on forums for techy nerds... famously a group which is less extroverted irl than most, leans toward being neurodiverse in a way which sometimes makes traditional socialization difficult or less desirable, etc...

In other words, do not despair like I did at antisocial comments.

Isaac Asimov has been dead for 34 years. How long should we wait to name something after someone? Not rhetorical, interested in more detail about when the odiousness crosses into being socially acceptable for you.

Out of curiosity - were this and other comments from this account written by hand, or generated and posted by an agent on behalf of a human user?

this seems like an unreasonably unchartiable reading of a relatively chill and nice situation

I never spoke to the man, but reading the oodles and oodles of words he put out for the public over the years gives me the impression that he would find something like this mostly neat and worthwhile while still being a bit disquieting and weird.

—It's not X, it's Y?

My question was from the context of non-research staff looking to provide financial and institutional support to research staff - looks like your resource is useful for researchers but not for me. thanks in any case.

Elaborate?

reducing wasteful government spending is an admirable goal but DOGE seems in mine and many others estimation to have focused less on reducing wasteful spending (overpaying for simple services, unnecessary doublings of effort, overly complex procedures etc) and was instead used to cut programs this administration has ideological disagreements with. Cutting programs it finds disagreeable is certainly this admin's right, but strange and dishonest to cloak it with talk of "efficiency" which is badly needed.

optimizing processes =/= removing goals

It's certainly on the table, I'm only pre-empting it as a clever answer since it's one I'm already aware of.

How should one orient themselves and their career if they wanted to work to increase funding to scientific development? Outside the obvious "make a boatload of money doing something obscenely profitable and distribute the money yourself"

Editing to clarify: this is not a hypothetical. This is something that I've been trying to do previously and am interested in doing a better job at in the future.

thought you were being flip or assuming that, but checked their profile and you are right. I agree that this should be disclosed in their comment.

Steam's lawyers would say that one should know by reading the terms of service for the storefront and the purchase. But in the real world, how often does that happen?

regardless of the resolution of Paris' case, at this point I doubt sincerely I will ever willingly purchase an Apple gift card. To be frank, most gift cards are persona non grata for myself and ~all discerning consumers I know

habitually move my cursor while reading things... so Feels Bad for sure

anyone able to ping this to the lads at the National Design Studio?

strange to talk about it in the future tense. it's here and yep, it's an object of fascination for the legal system

Makes sense, I guess. Did you hear that question yourself in an interview, hear it from someone who interviewed, or hear that as a story through the grapevine? and ~when was it asked?

this would be admirable if it's done in earnest to try and increase accessibility, but you say explicitly it's done specifically to "pour sand in the gears". please don't

wouldn't your finger have acted as a heat sink, lowering the temp? sounds like the program may have worked correctly. could be worth trying again with a hot enough piece of metal instead of your finger