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

On AI regulation and messaging

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 573 posts

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#551

Post by vrganj »

andsoitis wrote: post #547
vrganj wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we'll have to figure out the details, of course. As a first intuition, I feel like its mostly server farms and data centers that are the concern, large scale means of production. It feels right that those would be communally owned, be that via democratic government or maybe some sort of worker owned coop?

But those won't get built by companies in the first place, because you want to constrain what companies can own. Nothing prevents the government or coops today from building these things.

Budget does. Budget that you can extract by taxing hyperscalers aggressively.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#552

Post by andrekandre »

semiquaver wrote: post #523
andrekandre wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

could be, or the one where dr pulaski becomes an old lady...

Or the one where Tom Paris and Janeway turn into lizards and have babies.

i forgot about that one, that also reminds me, what janeway did to poor tuvix...

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#553

Post by ausbah »

reasonableklout wrote: post #496
tornikeo wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I genuinely think Dario is a well intentioned, intelligent dude, but I think him and Anthropic have a huge PR problem Is this what kids call rage bait these days?

It's admittedly a bubble, but Anthropic/Dario still have quite a good reputation among AI tech workers. They are seen as principled and willing to speak up about AI safety and societal impacts, even when it affects their bottom line (such as when being declared a supply chain risk by the Pentagon).

and how does the public view AI tech workers?

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#554

Post by ausbah »

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #410
reducesuffering wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean one look at both commentary and it's clear HN has devolved considerably. Just look at the atrocious difference in intelligent reasoning in this thread's comments compared to a LessWrong post right now: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/9RL9MuGZjzm4q3gKG/what-just-...

LW stayed selective as a forum, HN became the home of refugees from Reddit. HN reads more like yet-another-subreddit these days than an independent forum. FWIW I think this is an artifact of site design more than anything else. A commentary site like HN in 2026 encourages hot takes and karma farming. All the "social media" with higher quality commentary like Substack and LessWrong center a large text blob of thought…

substack has devolved into the same thing. opening the app first thing you see if a infinite scroll of twitter like takes

and i honestly would rather have a reddit lite site like hacker news where there appears to be at least a diversity of opinion than the pseudo-intellectualization cjing occurring among the exact same sort of AI cockgobblers on LW

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#555

Post by fizzbarnull »

mindwok wrote: post #89
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Curing cancer sounds insane, but it's also a research problem, I just don't buy the AI labs approach to this stuff. Like, unless we can basically simulate the entirety of human biology, I don't really see how LLMs can make progress here. Maths is different as it doesn't require a real-world interface, and programming already (by definition) can be simulated on a computer. Without that, I can't see much (if any) pro…

I'm a noob on this topic, but I think drug discovery is more amenable to this structurally than other problems. Simulating biology is what we were doing with protein folding before Alphafold, and the search space was far too large to find stuff in reasonable timeframes. Alphafold showed that you could take a physical process and make a neural net clever enough to learn just enough structure that it starts finding thi…

> Simulating biology is what we were doing with protein folding before Alphafold

This is not correct, Alphafold predicts crystal structures of proteins. It is a known issue in the field that these folding models do not generate ensembles of protein conformations like the ensembles generated by DE Shaw Research (who built a super computer to simulate proteins). And these folding models fail when we don't have crystal structures, so they are certainly not generalizing. A great paper on the subject: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.02.03.636309v1

Drug discovery is significantly more complicated than protein folding. Small molecules with similar chemistries can adopt novel binding poses, can end up binding to off targets (PXR, hERG, etc) or simply never make it to the protein due to solubility or permeability.

I will always defer to Pat Walters who seems like the most careful and sane person in this field: https://patwalters.github.io/

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#556

Post by ipsod »

gunapologist99 wrote: post #500
bpodgursky wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds smart until you think about it for ten seconds. If an ASI model is 100% aligned to user intent then you only need one person on earth to prompt "kill everyone" for an extinction-level invent. There's no logical way around this. The model either has to ignore the person at the helm or we have to do a multi-national abort before RSI. Anthropic is trying #1.

If everyone or even multiple competing groups have approx the same level of capability, it mitigates the risk to the group as a whole. We see this in biology all the time.

Doesn't work with certain threats. What the military calls NBC.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#557

Post by ipsod »

seydor wrote: post #369
ben8bit wrote: post #212

I really liked their brand position a year ago. But having Boris talk about "Claude's brain" on stage & their other founder pretending AI is sentient in front of the pope - they're coming off more as a religion than a tech company (and this is aside from the obvious model issues they're having).

That s the thing with all US companies (chinese cos don't seem to go metaphysical)

Is that just the companies speaking to their prospective markets? Maybe the US public loves metaphysical.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#558

Post by Karrot_Kream »

ausbah wrote: post #554
Karrot_Kream wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LW stayed selective as a forum, HN became the home of refugees from Reddit. HN reads more like yet-another-subreddit these days than an independent forum. FWIW I think this is an artifact of site design more than anything else. A commentary site like HN in 2026 encourages hot takes and karma farming. All the "social media" with higher quality commentary like Substack and LessWrong center a large text blob of thought…

substack has devolved into the same thing. opening the app first thing you see if a infinite scroll of twitter like takes and i honestly would rather have a reddit lite site like hacker news where there appears to be at least a diversity of opinion than the pseudo-intellectualization cjing occurring among the exact same sort of AI cockgobblers on LW

> and i honestly would rather have a reddit lite site like hacker news where there appears to be at least a diversity of opinion

Why? Isn't that available on literally every single other tech comment section on the Internet? Like what distinguishes these angry comments from the ones on Techcrunch or Ars or Reddit subs that tolerate AI? If I wanted mindless diversity I'd just have the LLM generate random perspectives.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#559

Post by chrislusf »

KronisLV wrote: post #91
blfr wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, it's not three years since. The real improvements in programming ability arrived in the last 6-8 months. Second, the Internet didn't show up much in GDP and similar measures either! But your point stands. Where are the amazing digital products/stuff? I get that it might take time to arrive as we scale up compute and learn new paradigms. But so much infra already exists (deployment pipeliens, everyone reachable…

> Where are the amazing digital products/stuff? I've done amounts of refactoring and fixes and written tooling that just wouldn't have happened before. I'm not sure what amazing new stuff y'all expect but the amount of technical debt in my projects is actually going down, cause I can finally get good enough test coverage, including E2E/load tests that actually prove whether the software works and scales or doesn't -…

Hi, KronisLV, I work on SeaweedFS and would like to know about the "issues with SeaweedFS failing under concurrent writes when backing Sentry". You can reply here or create a github issue for this. Appreciate it!

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#560

Post by chrislusf »

chrislusf wrote: post #559
KronisLV wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where are the amazing digital products/stuff? I've done amounts of refactoring and fixes and written tooling that just wouldn't have happened before. I'm not sure what amazing new stuff y'all expect but the amount of technical debt in my projects is actually going down, cause I can finally get good enough test coverage, including E2E/load tests that actually prove whether the software works and scales or doesn't -…

Hi, KronisLV, I work on SeaweedFS and would like to know about the "issues with SeaweedFS failing under concurrent writes when backing Sentry". You can reply here or create a github issue for this. Appreciate it!

Actually, I managed to reproduce this. It was caused by upstream grpc connection pool (https://github.com/grpc/grpc-go/issues/9330). Fixing it now.
Post reply on HN