peyton
peyton on Hacker News
They’re just gonna have to think a lot faster. Scuttlebutt is we’re going to 12k patient panels, up from about 2–3k. Better to prep for what’s coming.
Seems the answer is “no” to the first part of your question. From the filing:
> For example, one initial bid requested certain customer list information; however, by the first round of the Auction, the most competitive bidders had agreed to bid on an asset schedule that expressly excluded PII.
It’s also geographically distributed. Substantially all congressional districts count a healthcare system as a top-5 employer. Those 70k/yr butts-in-seats admin jobs are occupied by voters, making them difficult to eliminate nationally. You’d have to go down to the state level at least to get anything done.
You can get stuff done live on a call.
Wow, that explains why my order number mysteriously disappeared from their “now serving” screen even though I went at a time when the restaurant was empty.
What’s come next for me has been much better. I use ChatGPT cranked to Pro with “extended” thinking to one-shot whatever I would’ve spent time looking into with Google. It’ll plan the whole sunset bike ride or promposal or whatever from TFA.
I think we should refrain extending “negative externality” to mean “things people don’t like that might affect them.” Non-pecuniary externalities, in the Pigouvian sense, are really something you analyze to achieve efficiency. In this case, following a 5-year permitting process and plopping the industrial activity on industrial land is basically a form of bargaining and is probably acceptable from a social efficiency standpoint. Amazon’s hardly mining cobalt next to a daycare here.
Who knows. I wish ant harshly penalized speaking litotically because it’s essentially reward hacking as it can often be read multiple ways.
It’s also annoying as a human because Claude et al rate their own writing very highly, putting human<>LLM interactions at a disadvantage to human->LLM<>LLM interactions.
> Perhaps this is a modern replacement for religious fundamentalism for some people
I would say it’s narrower, loosely a sort of heresiology. It would be motivated by a strong internal sense of insiders vs. outsiders. Which isn’t saying much, but I think that’s that.
Further, Uncle Sam can always service dollar-denominated debt.
It’s going to the high frontier. Orbital/lunar. It’s too important not to harden.
Producers produce up to the point marginal benefit equals marginal cost. Tax on revenue inflates marginal cost and would create shortages etc.
You could fight conventionally over logistics chokepoints. China’s not going to lob nukes just because their oil’s dried up.
Why should I trust these randos instead of Claude? I know Claude. I would hope Claude is smarter than whoever wants to make rules about my use of Claude. Replace Claude with Kimi, etc. if needed.
I don’t find a petition from people I don’t know who don’t care about me more compelling than my own direct experience with these models.
It’s pretty clearly theft of services as generally defined in most places. It’s a hack in the same sense that rolling back your electric meter is a hack.
Feels like a just-so story. How to quantify “ambitious”? If the goal were flight, would jumping off cliffs with wings like birds be “ambitious”?
The most parsimonious explanation is either our models or methods (or both) are garbage. Something’s missing. The failure rate is insane, and writing it off as ambition or “biology is hard” rather than digging in does us no favors.
They don’t pay tax, right? Correct me if I’m wrong. It’s definitely a different (and public) conversation when things are claimed done for the public benefit and thus exempt from tax.
At least in the US tax-exempt status carries obligations.
I think you could be more charitable, as GP said “culture,” not “society.”
Apple alleges not only individual malfeasance, but also recruitment tactics like “show-and-tell” aimed at recruiting those willing to bring company secrets (and discriminating against those who would not).
This is enough to constitute a low-trust culture that self-perpetuates.
Surely given the size of China there are plenty of honorable people. And surely in the US there are many dishonorable people, as you’ve pointed out.
You get trustworthy people by trusting people. Generally when I was there there was a presumption of trust. Given how blatantly the defendants are alleged to have acted, that’s still the case.
I just asked Deepseek “tips for organizing politically in China” and hit the guardrail.
I but skimmed the model card on release, but my impression was that there may be an incentive for this expert panel to exaggerate as a form of job security. A lot of the challenges seemed to be of the form “would this allow somebody who isn’t me to do what I do professionally?”
Interesting. It would be easy to detect hate speech client-side too I’d imagine. My phone already listens for certain words.
It was a narrow miss. There was a time the crown wanted everyone farming cotton, but entrepreneurs pitched arbitrage instead.
Unfortunately you’d have no power to correct it. Even if such a thing were possible. I hope that changes.
You’re saying that they should take the money people pay to buy Xboxes and put it in T-bills instead of delivering Xboxes? What happens when people ask where the Xbox they ordered is?
Yep, those regulated marketing terms could use an update.
Regulators don’t make cures. There’s room to improve on that side of the system.
Especially as emerging approaches seem to be trending more systems-thinking-oriented, eg “this will strengthen your immune system to fight lots of diseases.”
Look up the Curley Effect for an explainer of what might be going on. I’m not Swedish but feel it may be worth examining given their rhetoric.
They have capital controls. Good luck moving yuan instead of Labubus.