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

OpenAI's super PAC is funding AI-generated news site attacking industry critics

modelrepublic.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 121 posts

Re: OpenAI's super PAC is funding AI-generated news site attacking industry critics

#91

Post by JumpCrisscross »

defrost wrote: post #13
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> would have to be state law so the president can't pardon them Sure. Based on cursory analysis, California (B&P § 17200 + § 17941), New York (§ 63(12)) and New Hampshire (RSA 664:14 / 664:16 + RSA 358-A) seem to be good places to start. Worst case, we get a public record of who paid for what under what pretences.

How's this kind of thing play in the US with free speech, Citizen's United, companies with money can make political statements, etc. What's the actual fraud angle? Non disclosure?

> What's the actual fraud angle?

…I literally quoted statute.

Re: OpenAI's super PAC is funding AI-generated news site attacking industry critics

#92

Post by defrost »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #91
defrost wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How's this kind of thing play in the US with free speech, Citizen's United, companies with money can make political statements, etc. What's the actual fraud angle? Non disclosure?

> What's the actual fraud angle? …I literally quoted statute.

Sure, and I literally asked you as you seemed familiar .. point taken, I'll f-off and read US law then.

Cheers.

BTW - I circled back and answered that question you asked of me. You're welcome. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48917128

Re: OpenAI's super PAC is funding AI-generated news site attacking industry critics

#93

Post by anonreplier »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #87
userbinator wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Had to look this up to see they really named it that, but then again, probably not surprising considering Musk's cars have a "ludicrous mode".

Yes, and others brains still runs in "pedestrian mode." Some of us prefer acceleration.

Not hard to accelerate something going that slowly

Re: OpenAI's super PAC is funding AI-generated news site attacking industry critics

#95

Post by kmfrk »

iammrpayments wrote: post #4

Probably doing something similar here. This place average post went from “look at this new javascript framework” to “I just became 100x more productive with AI” in the last 3 years

I understand why forums don't expose user IDs for scraping, but man it would be nice to just be able to tag users online with accounts created after the introduction of ChatGPT.

Re: OpenAI's super PAC is funding AI-generated news site attacking industry critics

#96

Post by simianwords »

emsign wrote: post #64
simianwords wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of conspiratorial thinking is ridiculous. My life is affected for better or worse because of AI - I’m forced to use it at my day job as an R&D. It is perfectly rational and expected and preferable for AI to be the front news in a technology forum. You probably don’t like AI but that is completely different from being affected by it.

I was talking about the metrics on HN you are talking about how AI improved you life (or didn't). Two different things in my opinion. I'm using AI myself btw. This isn't the point.

Your life is changed by it. You expect to not be shown posts on a technology forum on a technology that actually changed your life. How is this coherent?

Re: OpenAI's super PAC is funding AI-generated news site attacking industry critics

#97

Post by simianwords »

defrost wrote: post #58
simianwords wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Literally both can be true. Had a recent commenter insistent on calling out another HN user as a tool of the Chinese state boosting propaganda points. Either of them may well have been a paid commentator, but both also could hold a sincere belief in the points they were making.

You could also be a paid by Chinese propaganda. Or you could be sincere.

Re: OpenAI's super PAC is funding AI-generated news site attacking industry critics

#98

Post by simianwords »

lovich wrote: post #83
simianwords wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I was insinuating that this account is a bot, but perhaps you are a real human in the throes of AI psychosis. Who can tell until we remove anonymous posting from the internet? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Between the two of us, I'm the one who predicted the AI use correctly, and consequently my comment pattern reflects it. If I am a bot, then your epistemics are worse than a literal bot. Take a step back and see what that means.

Re: OpenAI's super PAC is funding AI-generated news site attacking industry critics

#99

Post by joshspankit »

Alifatisk wrote: post #52
Alien1Being wrote: post #38

Fraud, but a presidential pardon has already been paid for in advance.

You know whats crazy? We’re in bizarre times were this can actually be true. Things we joked about before which was obviously too nonsensical to be true is no longer the case in my world.

The tricky part about “layer 2 sarcasm” is that it has a tendency to inspire exactly the wrong people in to making it true

Re: OpenAI's super PAC is funding AI-generated news site attacking industry critics

#100

Post by JeremyNT »

surgical_fire wrote: post #88
bob1029 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was embarrassing a year+ ago when much of this technology barely worked at all. If you did not perceive a step change in model capabilities in late 2025, it's possible you are working on problems that are just too hard or not well aligned (e.g., arts and crafts). If you are working on software and need to move the occasional mountain, it's really hard to argue with the capabilities of contemporary models and harne…

A year+ ago, LLMs worked nearly as good as they work today. I say this as someone that uses LLMs on a daily basis. It is a moderately useful tool for software development, but it was already useful in January 2025 (to pick a random date). Check what models were available by then. There were improvements since them, but they were mostly marginal. The thing is, ever since ChatGPT 4 days there are people claiming on a d…

The "100x productive" thing is some kind of bogeyman. It's pretty clear these things are useful and helpful and the degree to which they are such continually improves, but putting some specific large number on it is pointless.

If you didn't notice a difference between AI assisted coding in Jan 2025 and now beyond "marginal" improvements... well to be frank I don't think you've really been paying very close attention. It's a combination of the way we interact with the models and the models themselves, and this really did get much more effective in late 2025.

You can say the model improvements in that year were incremental, but the degree to which the overall capabilities have changed and what that means for software development is more than the sum of those parts.

Post reply on HN