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

Working on Economics with Fable 5

wilsoniumite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 96 posts

Re: Working on Economics with Fable 5

#71

Post by estearum »

ekelsen wrote: post #56
estearum wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was actual work output I generated a few weeks back with Sonnet 5. Not posting here for obvious reasons, but it was nothing special or engineered for Pangram deception.

The real reason being that it doesn't exist?

Ya bro it's totally not possible to defeat a detection system that, in its own marketing on contrived, game-able benchmarks that they created, claims only a 99.6% true negative rate.

It has literally never been done.

What a hilarious inversion of credulity.

Re: Working on Economics with Fable 5

#72

Post by datsci_est_2015 »

jerf wrote: post #35
skew-aberration wrote: post #11

This is a topic I'm interested in, but the presentation and exposition on the website leaves a lot to be desired. Yes, it does make you sound like a crank. Almost all of the theory and predictions presented seems to be those of regular classical economics, per Smith, Riccardo, and particularly George. You can find them in Wealth of Nations, Progress and Poverty. This surprises people who have been failed by our educa…

So, like, legit pro AI tip, at least for 3rd-quarter 2026... whenever you're working on something interesting, ask the AI about prior art, or to do a scan of the scientific literature. Whether it's economics, health, or something algorithmic at work, at least the AIs I've used (as we've not all spent all the time with all the models) are still generally inclined to give you exactly what you ask for. They may do a goo…

As someone with a scientific background, and the word scientist in my title I guess this comes as a “no duh” to me. Prior art is table stakes. There should be nothing more embarrassing to a researcher than learning that they’ve failed to read and consider other work on a topic that’s easily accessible.

Re: Working on Economics with Fable 5

#73

Post by slopinthebag »

antisthenes wrote: post #69
s1artibartfast wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most libertarians think government institutions and their services are essential for society to function. They aren't anarchists after all.

They should really hold a group discussion then and talk about how they present themselves to the outgroup. Because in my experience talking with them, most don't, and the vast majority are anti-federal organizations of any kind. And these have been multiple discussions over the course of 20+ years.

That’s because unlike other political factions that treat politics as a team sport and prioritize group identity, libertarians tend to be free thinkers and have their own opinions and views.

Re: Working on Economics with Fable 5

#74

Post by jerf »

hanspagel wrote: post #61
jerf wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, like, legit pro AI tip, at least for 3rd-quarter 2026... whenever you're working on something interesting, ask the AI about prior art, or to do a scan of the scientific literature. Whether it's economics, health, or something algorithmic at work, at least the AIs I've used (as we've not all spent all the time with all the models) are still generally inclined to give you exactly what you ask for. They may do a goo…

> why this is already well known, probably well known to be a bad and wrong idea. This is still pointing the LLM in a specific direction . You might want to prompt something like “give me a summary of relevant literature” and avoid sharing your point of view. Wdyt?

It's to compensate for the effect where they are still a bit of a yes man. Way, way better than they were several models ago where they were pathological about it, but still a bit biased in the direction of explaining why you're right. I know I'm not right. I don't want a neutral summary, I want an interesting discussion of what's wrong with my idea and why.

If I were operating in a field in which I was already an expert, or in a field that is more strongly opinion-based anyhow (e.g., philosophy... it isn't particularly clear that being an "expert" in philosophy has any strong impact on your chances of being "right", for whatever that even means in that field), I might ask for something more neutral, but I know I'm not.

Re: Working on Economics with Fable 5

#75

Post by estearum »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #57
wat10000 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We tend to own property in places where land is expensive, we'd be paying hefty taxes in a Georgist system.

I would expect that land usage favors the very rich, but not nearly as much as income. Georgism does a excellent job of incentivising better land use, but is trivial to shelter income from. A teacher renting a run down aprtment might have a similar land tax footprint to a tech ceo in a taller building, or maybe the ceo just teleworks from home in Wyoming. xAI or whomever puts their next Mega server farm on undesirabl…

You seem to think the point of a taxation scheme is to tax everything. It's not.

It's to 1) fund services while 2) minimizing distortions.

If someone can consume land of no value and produce huge amounts of value from it, that's a good thing. They should be entitled to as much upside as they can produce.

Re: Working on Economics with Fable 5

#76

Post by estearum »

reverius42 wrote: post #51
wat10000 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We tend to own property in places where land is expensive, we'd be paying hefty taxes in a Georgist system.

It would also help incentivize real improved use of expensive property, and less speculative investment without improvement, perhaps leading to lower prices (thus lower land value, and lower taxes), perhaps reaching some kind of equilibrium with better improved land use in expensive areas, less speculation resulting in the expensive areas being less expensive, and more equitable taxation than our current system.

Yes basically you should expect to see significant densification with significant competition in how appealing to the market you can make that level of density (since you as the developer keep all the upside).

Re: Working on Economics with Fable 5

#77

Post by estearum »

slopinthebag wrote: post #73
antisthenes wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should really hold a group discussion then and talk about how they present themselves to the outgroup. Because in my experience talking with them, most don't, and the vast majority are anti-federal organizations of any kind. And these have been multiple discussions over the course of 20+ years.

That’s because unlike other political factions that treat politics as a team sport and prioritize group identity, libertarians tend to be free thinkers and have their own opinions and views.

I can predict virtually every single opinion a self-labeled "libertarian" has about the world.

Now granted, among the people who are actually free-thinkers and have their own opinions, you will find many libertarian-adjacent views, but I've found that those people do not refer to themselves as libertarians.

Re: Working on Economics with Fable 5

#78

Post by s1artibartfast »

estearum wrote: post #75
s1artibartfast wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would expect that land usage favors the very rich, but not nearly as much as income. Georgism does a excellent job of incentivising better land use, but is trivial to shelter income from. A teacher renting a run down aprtment might have a similar land tax footprint to a tech ceo in a taller building, or maybe the ceo just teleworks from home in Wyoming. xAI or whomever puts their next Mega server farm on undesirabl…

You seem to think the point of a taxation scheme is to tax everything. It's not. It's to 1) fund services while 2) minimizing distortions. If someone can consume land of no value and produce huge amounts of value from it, that's a good thing. They should be entitled to as much upside as they can produce.

Im more a small goverment type.

That said, the point of a taxation scheme is not to "minimize distortions". If you think that is important, thats fine, but it isn't a commonly held position.

Funnily, It is mostly Georgists that think it is a very important property of a tax.

Re: Working on Economics with Fable 5

#79

Post by slopinthebag »

estearum wrote: post #77
slopinthebag wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s because unlike other political factions that treat politics as a team sport and prioritize group identity, libertarians tend to be free thinkers and have their own opinions and views.

I can predict virtually every single opinion a self-labeled "libertarian" has about the world. Now granted, among the people who are actually free-thinkers and have their own opinions, you will find many libertarian-adjacent views, but I've found that those people do not refer to themselves as libertarians.

lmao funny you say that because i dont call myself a libertarian despite holding many adjacent views....

there's also a difference between Libertarians and libertarians. im not american so i refer to the latter but i know what u mean

Re: Working on Economics with Fable 5

#80

Post by ekelsen »

estearum wrote: post #71
ekelsen wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real reason being that it doesn't exist?

Ya bro it's totally not possible to defeat a detection system that, in its own marketing on contrived, game-able benchmarks that they created , claims only a 99.6% true negative rate. It has literally never been done. What a hilarious inversion of credulity.

So show us the prompt
Post reply on HN