Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

James Watson has died

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 303 posts

Re: James Watson has died

#32

Post by DonHopkins »

Uptrenda wrote: post #22
timonoko wrote: post #13

[flagged]

I'm well aware of Watson's views that got him cancelled. I know that Grok is meant to be the "uncensored, unbiased" version of LLMs. But the training data still reflects human bias, and there is definitely some irony in using an LLM for "objectivity." I do wonder what HN thinks about this though. Whether you can prompt an LLM to reflect more balanced takes that humans could do in controversial topics (assuming the LL…

Well timonoko also posts Grok generated FORTH code that doesn't work, and then retroactively claims it was just a joke when called on it, so it's safe to assume he doesn't know what he's talking about, that he and Grok and grokipedia are always joking and making shit up, and not to take any of them seriously, because he believes what he wants to believe without fact checking, and he post Grok generated AI slop regularly.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44179381

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=timonoko

timonoko:

    FORTH ?KNOW IF HONK ELSE UP SHUT OFF FUCK AND THEN

Re: James Watson has died

#34

Post by golem14 »

nerf0 wrote: post #12

What's with the "is dead at"? I'm not a native speaker but it seems a bit disrespectful.

  Claude Achille Debussy, Died, 1918.
  Christophe Willebald Gluck, Died, 1787.
  Carl Maria von Weber, Not at all well, 1825. Died, 1826.
  Giacomo Meyerbeer, Still alive, 1863. Not still alive, 1864.
  Modeste Mussorgsky, 1880, going to parties. No fun anymore, 1881.
  Johan Nepomuk Hummel, Chatting away nineteen to the dozen   with his mates down the pub every evening, 1836. 1837, nothing.


  -- Michael Palin

Re: James Watson has died

#35

Post by catigula »

Jun8 wrote: post #15
dsr_ wrote: post #5

[flagged]

This is an ignorant take on what really happened. There are many sources online to better understand what happened, you might want to start with the Nature article: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01313-5 If you want to attack Watson, his comments on race later in life is a better angle.

What comments did he make and what type of fact-based concerns do you have with them?

Re: James Watson has died

#36

Post by thot_experiment »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #23
Jun8 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an ignorant take on what really happened. There are many sources online to better understand what happened, you might want to start with the Nature article: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01313-5 If you want to attack Watson, his comments on race later in life is a better angle.

FWIW watson was incredibly racist against scots-irish americans, repeatedly calling them dumb in his lectures. that doesn't necessarily excuse his casual racism, but i would assume he meant to imply that people can overcome their genetic ingroups' statistical predilections

lmao that's an extremely charitable take that doesn't comport with other racist bullshit he said

Re: James Watson has died

#37

Post by catigula »

thot_experiment wrote: post #36
throwawaymaths wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW watson was incredibly racist against scots-irish americans, repeatedly calling them dumb in his lectures. that doesn't necessarily excuse his casual racism, but i would assume he meant to imply that people can overcome their genetic ingroups' statistical predilections

lmao that's an extremely charitable take that doesn't comport with other racist bullshit he said

What specificially did he say and why did it upset you?

I am genuinely curious, I could google it easily enough, but it's actually more interesting why people have a certain impression of things and how strongly they've interrogated the accuracy of that impression.

Post reply on HN