I’d argue the majority of casual online PC discourse is driven by gaming. By the numbers LTT is the largest PC/IT/consumer computer YouTube channel and the majority of their content is focused on gaming.
Most people are capable of long-term learning. Some people are capable of discovering and inventing new things. I think the two are related, and current NN architecture doesn’t allow this. An AI that can cobble together a CRUD application to spec is one thing. An AI that can come up with a new idea for a successful app on its own is a completely different ball game.
I have a thinkpad p1 with popos, but it doesn’t sleep properly. Closing the lid causes it to be super active. I have to lay it down up side down so the ventilation gaps are not blocked, otherwise it overheats. Burned one SSD this way.
Fixed it with the help of claude, it quickly helped me diagnose the issue and fix it. The drivers for the discrete nvidia graphics card had suspend disabled. Enabling it enabled automatic suspend when closing the lid.
It's a shame politicians can't be kept accountable tens of years from now. It would be great that if in 25 years it turns out global warming does indeed cause huge problems for humans, we could sue the politicians that took irresponsible risks with the environment. Now they can just focus on short term gains, and ignore all the long term side effects.
I really think we need to change the system to create some sort of accountability here. I think a number of people in the current government need to go prison.
whoa...whoa... hold on there, did you say "woke"? Sorry but they're going to outlaw being "woke", so they have to shut down all the institutions that spread "wokeness" first, and that includes any and all providing climate data.
Once they eradicate "wokeness" from the government, then they can just declare something or someone "woke" and then get punitive with them. Or at least that's one way I think it could play out given the actions being taken.
"You can't blame us for that, that was President Newsom's 2034 policy! Our climate expert says so, and his credentials is that he's the go-to climate expert that Fox News turns to whenever the libs talk about climate change!"...
And the J.D. Vance nominated judge will say "not guilty!"...
> It's a shame politicians can't be kept accountable tens of years from now. It would be great that if in 25 years it turns out global warming does indeed cause huge problems for humans, we could sue the politicians that took irresponsible risks with the environment. Now they can just focus on short term gains, and ignore all the long term side effects.
This is a super interesting perspective.. but instead of only looking to the future, could we apply this to the past?
aka Were there predictions about global warming in 2015, 2000, or earlier that drove policy that ended up being incorrect?
A good start for actually holding people accountable in the US would be prosecuting the entire chain of command responsible for blowing up unarmed South American boats and then murdering the survivors. That one's concrete, proven to have happened, and illegal under multiple standards of law, so if we can't at least make that happen anything else is unlikely.
I think a prohibition to lie to the public would already be incredibly impactful (if it had no statute of limitations and adequate punishments).
A delicate issue I see is how to handle personal matters that the public don't need to know.
Anyhow, you might think that it's hard to know when someone is really lying vs just being uninformed, but in truth in the long term most lies become apparent; while you couldn't prevent
every single lie, you'd reduce them enormously, in my opinion; even in countries where the president doesn't lie almost constantly.
I am a boomer and I absolutely give a "flying fink". Stop stereotyping my generation. The group I worked in at NASA Goddard did visualizations of climate data. I heard directly from climate scientists what was going on in the world and it terrified me. When I heard about what's being done to NCAR I nearly cried. I have no children but I have told all my friends' kids how sorry I am that we're leaving them a mess to clean up. How's that for a "flying fink"?
Better safe than sorry. If the risk is significant, and the impact is big, it is sensible to have plan to address risks. You probably have many expenses you hope you never need, like all sorts of insurances. And even if it turns out climate changes was less impactful than forcasted, change sparks innovation and creates economic opportunity. E.g, these days electrucs cars are better than fossil fuel cars (my wife wont let me lease another fossil fuel car, she likes the way the electric one drives much better), and solar electricity is cheaper than fossil electricity.
There are a vast number of scientists in agreement with each other that it is not a nothingburger.
It takes nothing but stark intentional ignorance to make a statement like yours.
It absolutely boggles my mind at the suggestion that green energy is all profit seeking, as if the counterparties in big oil aren't also just as or more interested in maintaining status quo in the opposite direction. Yet I never see someone who expresses ideas like this recognize or acknowledge that.
Switching to renewables and mass transit can improve the quality of life for people who live in urban environments because it makes the air they breath cleaner.
This is a major reason why developing countries are leapfrogging the west on this sort of stuff. Massive S.E. Asian cities are experiencing tremendous health benefits from the green revolution.
It's mostly built atop problem shifting. For example, Seattle fought to send their compost and build wind farms in eastern Washington - where it was in someone else's backyard.
Similar to battery recycling - which might end up being "recycled" by some 8 year old kid in SE Asia with a sledgehammer.
At worst the same way that performing CPR on a man with a heart attack is problem shifting, or feeding the hungry only makes them hungry again in the future.
Wind turbines are not problems. They are opportunities. Notice that thr specious bullshit problems cited with wind turbines go away in rural areas once farmers are the ones making money on them.
> It's mostly built atop problem shifting. For example, Seattle fought to send their compost and build wind farms in eastern Washington - where it was in someone else's backyard.
This is a silly opinion to have. It's like complaining that reinforcing police presence in an area is problem shifting because you'll still have crime taking place somewhere else. It's an attempt to frame any action as a false dilemma that forces an all-or-nothing logic based on specious reasoning.
If it doesn't turn into a nothingburger *, can we get back the glaciers, the climate and the people who died to help your own cronies get some more billions?
* (that is, if there's not a global conspiracy of pedo-scientists set to harm poor oil tycoons)
While I agree that the results of these policies are devastating, why blame the politicians? They were voted for, and it's not like they were hiding their agendas.
Well they kind of are, in that the real perps are not them but folks like the Koch family who fund entire think tanks and counter programming to serve their narrow interests. They give money to the politicians in exchange for this viewpoint. It gets woven into so much of a bubbles fabric that it becomes self-reinforcing.
Again, if the voters bought it they are responsible for it and not the advocates. There is a reason that nobody named in the Epstein files is running a normalize pedophilia campaign. Because contrary to the rhetoric about money being the end all in politics it doesn't work for everything.
People as a whole are not experts in every possible area, nor is everyone universally smart. When politics get bought at an entire party level for decades, it’s hard to place blame on those who allow it. Don’t forget that culture wars is used as a wedge such that everything is combined. People don’t get to vote on their issues, they vote on buckets of viewpoints.
Fox News literally had a segment on the difference between pedophilia and some other philia whose name I forget.. it was basically saying hey they weren’t 5, they were 14-16! That’s different! Wonder why they’d feel the need to air that viewpoint…
(I'm including in this replies to both the comment immediately above and your comment two levels up from that)
> Well they kind of are, in that the real perps are not them but folks like the Koch family who fund entire think tanks and counter programming to serve their narrow interests.
The Kochs also fund Nova on PBS which has produced and continues to produce a large amount of in-depth scientifically accurate reporting about climate change.
> People as a whole are not experts in every possible area, nor is everyone universally smart
But there are experts and there are smart people who write about what they experts say. Someone doesn't have to be either an expert themself or smart themself to realize that they should try to find what those experts and those smart people think in important areas so they can better choose politicians who will handle policy in those areas correctly.
A heck of a lot of voters put in less effort looking into competing claims of rival Presidential candidates than they do to check out the claims of rival manufacturers when they want to buy an air fryer.
Yes, the politicians that do bad things should be blamed, but I'm also going to blame the people who voted for them if the politicians said they would do those things and even a little research by the voter would have turned up that those things are bad.
That is why the argument is not against guns per se, but against human access to guns. Gun laws aim to limit access to guns. Problems only start when humans have guns. Some for AI, maybe we should limit human access to AI.
There’s a ton of difference provided on top of the LLMs, especially the tools that allow LLMs to engineer their own context, validate generated code, test generate code, research code bases, planners, memory, skills, etc. The difference is night and day: like a brain in a closed jar versus a brain in a mobile human with eyes, ears, mouth and hands.
I had a conversation with Claude code 2 weeks ago where it mentioned early support for LSP had been added into Claude code. Have been working on a LSP for a custom language since then.
Yesterday i used Claude Code to define and implement a YAML based DSL for playing backing tracks. I can ask an LLM to generate this DSL for any well known song, and it will include chord progression, lyrics, bass, drums, strumming pattern, etc. It's a go command line tool that plays the DSL via midi, and displays the chords, strumming patterns, and lyrics. Also does export to Strudel.
The problem I see is: people are not going to use a project that is AI generated for long really, unless they do it just for a one-off task. I'd like to constantly generate new music. I also have ideas based on existing music so I want to adjust this, but do so programmatically, and that seems ... hard.
Not a big commitment from a user, and nothing lost if it doesn´t work as hoped.
I'm just positively surprised how quickly you can create a prototype for these sorts of ideas with Claude Code. This is literally just a few hours of vibe-coding.
Depending on the source music, there are many aspects of this that normally require a license with a records company or some proxy. Especially the lyrics part. Be careful not to get into very expensive trouble. Just because the LLM can do it, doesn’t mean it’s ok to do it.
Yes, I noticed that Claude Code silently refused to generate lyrics for some songs i requested. Benefit of this approach is that anybody can quickly generate a YAML file for a backing track, no need to share it anywhere.
I think the problem is that the artist doesn't get anything with this approach. If you really want to use someone else's music/artworks/lyrics, just buy it.
It's not like this is very unique, YouTube has tons of training and backing track videos, which is what i typically use. And artist don't sell it in a way that can be consumed for guitar practice easily.
Skills don’t solve the problem if you think an llm should know everything. But if you see LLMs mostly as a text plan-do-check-act machine that can process input text, generate output text, and can create plans how to create more knowledge and validate the output, without knowing everything upfront, skills are perfectly fine solution.
The value of standardizing skills is that the skills you define work with any agentic tool. Doesn't matter how simple they are, if they dont work easily, they have no use.
You need a practical and efficient way to give the llm your context. Just like every organization has its own standards, best practices, architectures that should be documented, as new developers do not know this upfront, LLMs also need your context.
An llm is not an all knowing brain, but it’s a plan-do-check-act text processing machine.
Replacing workers has been going on for many years, just ask mineworkers, factory employees, and many other workers. It seems that here on hackernews we're happy if this happens when it bring down prices and doesn't impact our jobs. But once it starts effecting software engineers it's the end of the world?
I do see and agree with the dangers of AI, but it would have been a bit less selfish if we'd been this concerned when other jobs got replaced by automation.
