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

221–230 of 572 posts

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#221

Post by GPerson »

I don’t think my people got my previous post but apparently a lot of diseases were on track to being cured regardless of the invention of LLM based AI. One thing that bothers me about this technology is it makes it easy to attribute all effort to it. This not only hurts the ego but also makes it difficult to reason about how effective it is compared to how effective the people using it are.

Secondly, if you look at what Dario has actually written, then the cure to the big conditions like cancer is in his view hopefully going to be a result of scientists working 10x faster and therefore making big Nobel prize paradigm shifting discoveries 10x faster. So Anthropic suggesting “we are going to cure cancer” doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. According to his original vision it looks like a bunch of groups now using AI independently producing breakthroughs which cure cancer.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#222

Post by a2ff6eeb0 »

eloisius wrote: post #168
vrganj wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an ideological thing. (We just had a conversation about ideology actually, remember?) Capitalism has always been a tension between capitalists, who want maximum return on capital and workers, who want pesky things like a living wage, sick leave or safe work conditions. For the longest time, the only power labor has had to get those things was the power of collective bargaining. No agreement with your workers mea…

If they had AGI, why would they need consumers anymore? Just use your drone army to secure all natural resources and produce whatever you need for yourself. Other humans are just pets.

And this is why we need to escape the permanent underclass.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#223

Post by throwaway_7274 »

raincole wrote: post #220
throwaway_7274 wrote: post #214

Just want to say, this comment section on this website would have been unthinkable a few years ago. It’s wild: all the engineers have developed class consciousness. I wonder how that happened? Anyway, it’s fun to watch, but remember to stay sane guys, be aware of the pendulum dynamics.

> I wonder how that happened Layoff.

Rhetorically wondering :)

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#224

Post by bonsai_spool »

alphazard wrote: post #180
eloisant wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Besides cancer isn't really "a disease" but rather "a family of diseases" that can vary a lot. Even breast cancer can be one of many different cancers. It's like saying "we'll cure infectious diseases"

"Cancer isn't a single disease" is often shouted from the Dunning-Kruger peak of cancer research. I think it was popularized by an explainer video on Youtube, and now it's being memed. The people who think this way want to legitimize funding a particular research niche that they benefit from. A more sophisticated view is that cancer (one idea) is an problem of rates (like most things in biology) and there is a tumor…

[dead]

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#225

Post by jacquesm »

stnikolauswagne wrote: post #196
jacquesm wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it quite possibly creates a huge risk for the company in the longer term, there is only one person who knows how that all works.

Honestly not super sure if that is more of a risk than it was pre-llm. As part of the aquisition I got access to their previous codebase which was some sort of incomprehensible PHP monolith, with the persons who wrote that code long gone. Thanks to LLMs I was actually able to extract the core useful concepts (again, sufficiently deep domain knowledge that I knew exactly what to look for). Without LLMs i would have pr…

But that codebase was written by people, so you'd be well positioned to take it over. I wonder if the same would be the case if you were to take over a codebase that was written by AI.

By that point it might no longer matter though, but I suspect that such code would have a lot more exposed edge cases than one where someone actually thought things through before coding.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#226

Post by RandomLensman »

kanzure wrote: post #217
fnord123 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We will cure virus.

> We will cure virus. It is possible to prevent most viruses by recoding the human genome (requires embryo engineering or pre-embryo engineering) to use alternate codons that existing natty viruses don't use. This wouldn't prevent synthetic viruses from being developed that use the alternate codons, of course. See (1) https://diyhpl.us/wiki/transcripts/hgp-write/2016-05-10/ultr... and (2) https://diyhpl.us/wiki/trans…

How would you address the non-interchangeable nature of synonymous codons? Do we know the right replacements?

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#227

Post by 3dsnano »

i’m all for ambition and tenacity, but this is psychopath level communication… blissfully unaware, simply incapable of reading the room

if claude still can’t yet write and refactor coherent code (on its own, replacing software engs, just like he said last year), why would we expect it to… fucking cure cancer?

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#228

Post by jacquesm »

meindnoch wrote: post #167
jLaForest wrote: post #149

[flagged]

context: https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2026/08/14/who-is-... "Cami Clark, the low-profile wife of Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, tried to court Jeffrey Epstein as an investor for her “luxury porn company” and women’s health startup, the Wall Street Journal and emails in the Epstein files reveal, as the Journal’s reporting raises new questions about Clark’s influence over her powerful husband and his company.…

Details...

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#229

Post by QwenGlazer9000 »

pas wrote: post #45
ben_w wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone saying 10x as a serious claim is clearly using a round number and vibes; however, even if it were so, AI getting popular 3 years ago does not mean what you say. The earliest used models in this category would easily 10x (what did I just say) the creation of one-off short scripts, but you're not writing a 30-year app out of just a bunch of short scripts. The METR time horizons graph suggests we can now get 10x…

LLM-assisted software engineering seems to be very efficient if you have a deterministic target. (bun rewrite from zig to Rust, 100% Node.js compatibility, pnpm compatibility -- https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/pull/38333 )

Problem with that is that it's not proper rust code, it's some kind of franken zig style rust port.

The actual hard part is getting it into idiomatic, safe rust, and I don't believe the LLM port makes the full transition any easier than doing things the old fashioned way: a dual lang code base like Linux.

Re: On AI regulation and messaging

#230

Post by gbrindisi »

ed_mercer wrote: post #124
dude250711 wrote: post #5

So, what does a for-profit CEO, beholden to profit-seeking investors, have to say?

Yes, he has financial incentives. That doesn't automatically make what he says false or dishonest.

it kinda does unless he is straightforward about his financial incentives
Post reply on HN