Viewing profile — jsnell
jsnell
HN member- Joined
- Fri, Oct 26, 2007, 11:58 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 33,987
- Public activity
- 4,571 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About jsnell
Only speaking for myself, not my employer.
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #49172827
100% of my income in the "employment" segment is coming from a single employer. That's an unsustainable level of concentration, showing there just isn't sufficient demand for my sk…
-
comment
Comment #49158667
Original submission (460 votes) two days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49132058 For some reason comments got moved to this one.
-
comment
Comment #49144667
Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49132058
-
comment
Comment #49142112
Flagging since statcounter's data is just so unreliable that discussing it is like discussing last week's lottery numbers. (Just a couple of weeks ago there was an equally implausi…
-
comment
Comment #49142053
Good grief that thread is sad, with it ending by Gary Marcus asking for the crank to be taken seriously.
-
comment
Comment #49141286
There's no business in straight-up news aggregation. Google News is purely a public service (it isn't monetized) and a liability (see the regular attempts by governments to make Go…
-
comment
Comment #49141208
Now, now, let's be fair. I don't think LLMs are used for writing or editing the articles in any way. (Each reader can decide themselves whether what you wrote is unfair to Zitron o…
-
comment
Comment #49135059
The original was an actual quote? But "had" still doesn't mean what you are implying: once the model solved the problems and the solutions were verified, the problems weren't open …
- comment
-
comment
Comment #49100086
> analysts have estimated that it will take $2 trillion a year in revenue to pay for the infrastructure that has already been built I doubt any credible analyst has claimed that. W…
-
comment
Comment #49087837
> A back-of-the-envelope calculation finds that covering AI capex through identifiable AI income requires revenue on the order of $2.5trn per year, Ok, so what is the botec? They d…
-
comment
Comment #49078903
Isn't it up to the open model advocates and publishers to come up with the solutions for making them safe? Like, there's three plausible arguments about safety of open models: 1. A…
-
comment
Comment #49075190
The publisher, in this case Postbank, decides what countries to allow installs from for an app. Google just enforces the policy the publisher sets.
-
comment
Comment #49072928
It's very hard to make sure none of the outputs are ever made available to third parties. Source code can end up widely distributed (e.g. client-side js, open source). Prose will f…
-
comment
Comment #49072537
Some of his numbers are rebutted all the time. It doesn't matter, because he will just ignore the rebuttals and just keep repeating the invalid or irrelevant numbers. For example, …
-
comment
Comment #49071614
You're biasing for quantity of argument vs. quality of argument. That's Zitron's MO: writing 10k word rambles that cover 20 topics, ostensibly with tons of links to sourcing, but w…
-
comment
Comment #49060668
Early in terms of there being no sign of actual signs of decay of their business. It's less than a week since Google reported literally the highest quarterly profits by any public …
-
comment
Comment #49053678
Relevant article + discussion from earlier today: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49014034
-
comment
Comment #49052873
The exact claim I was replying to "It does that by increasing the cost of scraping, not by preventing it entirely." In that context, quantifying the cost isn't theoretical nitpicki…
-
comment
Comment #49052337
Except it does not actually increase the cost of scraping meaningfully. Compute is really cheap. The compute for minting an Anubis cookie will cost less than a thousandth of a cent…
-
comment
Comment #49050187
Unbearable AI slop, flagged.
-
comment
Comment #49045675
Your title leaving out the "innocent" part makes it a stunningly inaccurate summary.
-
comment
Comment #49045048
Uhh... This is not a popularity chart. It is an aggregate of benchmarks. It baffles me that somebody would write something that aggressive from that deep a level of confusion.
- story
-
comment
Comment #48877538
[flagged] means flagged by users; if it was done by the system, it'd be [dead]. I can't speak for others, but the reason I flagged it is that the number is untrustworthy and absurd…