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

The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization

avkcode.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 718 posts

Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization

#501

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

CMay wrote: post #339
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europe has way stronger data protection laws than the US. EU has GDPR, strict requirements, large fines. US only has a couple states protecting personal data, with HIPAA for health data, and that's it. We require you to unlock all your devices within 100 miles of a border (inland) so we can look at all your data. Of course our intelligence service also hoovers up the metadata of US citizens in contact with anyone ove…

The US accepts immigrants from 200+ countries around the world with the top 5 being Mexico, Cuba, India, Dominican Republic and China. None of that has changed under Trump. I think you got lost in the rhetoric somewhere. Tariffs are just the US adjusting to reality which other countries are slow to do. Free trade died all on its own, because the pandemic showed that critical industries were hollowed out by free trade…

Are you seriously trying to reframe the largest tariff war in 100 years, targeting 180 countries and territories, as a readjustment against China? And in both of Trump's terms he's radically changed immigration more than at any time since the 1960's. Either this is a great troll, or you need help, man.

Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization

#503

Post by vel0city »

ericmay wrote: post #500
vel0city wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who cares? People who prefer truth in advertising. > Why be so argumentative over something so stupid? I don't want people to believe untrue marketing statements and make poor financial decisions without actually bothering to read the fine print. > some companies run free promotions This just isn't true. They're not really "free". They come with lots of financial commitments. > Apparently Verizon ran some promo in…

I already made and proved my point. The iPhone is not a status symbol, and major carriers can and do give them away in various schemes and did so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. You’re anchoring yourself to one payment scheme and ignoring others and it’s besides the point which is that iPhones aren’t status symbols even if these schemes didn’t exist and iPhones weren’t extremely cheap or freely…

> The iPhone is not a status symbol

I already said I largely agreed with this.

> major carriers can and do give them away in various schemes and did so in the past and will continue to do so in the future

They only do if you're financially illiterate.

> You’re anchoring yourself to one payment scheme and ignoring others

I'm being honest and taking about the real deal instead of blindly repeating marketing bullshit and lies.

> freely available

A commitment to spend thousands of dollars isn't the same as freely available.

The bank gave me this free house all I have to do is pay this mortgage for thirty years. But hey the house was free!

Once again, was the deal that you could walk into the store, grab a new iPhone, and walk out without signing a contract or other form of commitment? If not, it's not really free. It's bad financial advice for people struggling financially to get one of these "free" phones, they're often more expensive than buying outright and getting a much cheaper (or potentially even subsidized!) plan. Especially if you're just needing one or two lines. Many of these postpaid plans only really make financial sense once you're at like 4+ lines on it.

I'm reminded of seeing all those cell phones in the RadioShack mailer ads back in the day. Only 99¢! Dad, can't I get one? It's only a dollar!.

If you spent hundreds of dollars on box seats to a sporting event and they had a complimentary buffet, is that food really free or did it cost you hundreds of dollars? Would you tell someone struggling with money they could get free food, they just need to go spend hundreds on sports tickets first?

Maybe one shouldn't be so willingly close-minded to the truth.

Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization

#504

Post by Kuyawa »

satvikpendem wrote: post #422
Kuyawa wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've built five apps in the last month using DeepSeek, spending less than $1 in total. I am totally in love with DeepSeek and my wife knows it :)

What sorts of apps are those? I tried testing various models with a test app as a benchmark, a local first app with CRDTs, and many, even frontier models, struggle heavily.

https://mediconsulta.net an AI medical assistant

https://decaboy.fit for tracking progress at they gym

https://megaparley.com sports betting platform

A horse betting platform not published yet, still looking for an API odds provider

A car mechanic AI assistant not published yet

I've learned that the more detailed the initial prompt the better result I get. I can share any prompt if you want

Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization

#505

Post by 22ekeke »

naveen99 wrote: post #486
jmyeet wrote: post #93

Back in the dot-com bubble, people started inventing new metrics to "value" dot-com companies that lost money hand over fist. My favorite was "revenue multiples". So instead of a a P/E ratio, it was just a multiple of revenue no matter how much money you lost. We've invented a new term here too: revenue backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic in particular need to recover probably at least $2 trillion to recoup their capex inv…

Labor displacement is also called rising productivity.

No it doesn’t - it means cost efficiency. Incremental productivity can remain flat - unless you’re a bozo who counts LOC.

Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization

#506

Post by coredev_ »

input_sh wrote: post #149
rhubarbtree wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is trying to undermine the US economy through open source models. If they can down round or bankrupt the model companies, they take down the US. Currently the US is extremely vulnerable and dependent on China. AI is an important exception, so it’s key for China to destroy that

The US is undermining its own (and everyone else's) economy just fine, no imaginary assistance from China necessary. The role of the US was always to purchase cheap Chinese hardware, slap some modestly better software on top of it and the rest of the world happily would pay for that as a whole package. But with the US increasingly becoming isolationist, the rest of the world is starting to wonder why do we need the U…

This is spot on. The US under MAGA are actively dismantling their once leading position in IT as well as defence. I guess it is hard to see as a US citizen but from outside this is clear as glass.

Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization

#507

Post by hattmall »

trhway wrote: post #404
dgellow wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The discourse on this topic is at the point where I have no idea if people are serious or satirical. Please tell me you don’t seriously believe data centers in spaces is a realistic idea

I don't "believe". I'm arithmetically sure that it is going to happen, and it will beat the ground based on pretty much all metrics. Some of my comments with napkin numbers https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46882199 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46880680 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46880486 Just a very rough primitive illustration - a land for a house in SV is like a $1M, and putting a 10 ton house…

You would need like 1,000,000,000,000 SQFT of solar panels to even begin to approximate a space based directed energy weapon that has a fraction of the effect of a nuclear weapon. Tens of thousands of times more than all that have ever been produced on earth. And then you have to move them to space.

Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization

#508

Post by coredev_ »

lmm wrote: post #461
MetaWhirledPeas wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are winning because West is forbidden to use Chinese models for anything work-related. Because the models hosted in China are not trusted. This is 100% a part of what makes up commercialization.

Is anyone outside the US trusting anything hosted in today's US? If so, why?

I would say that both US and China are using the data we trust upon them for industrial espionage. So don't use their models if you are working defence or other sensitive areas

Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization

#509

Post by bawolff »

ctkhn wrote: post #377
blahblaher wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the US cannot imagine anything else. Everything is a War, and the US must always win..

The US needs to start imagining something else. It's hard to think of the last war that the US won.

And yet they rule the world. Whether or not US won any specific war seems academic when (up until recently) they were clearly winning the game.

Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization

#510

Post by bawolff »

mghackerlady wrote: post #117
bluGill wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't a war today. However China wants Taiwan: war is future option they preparing for - they might or might not go to war but they are clearly preparing. The US is likely to get involved in such a war and I would expect Europe to join in as well. Don't ask me what Trump is doing though.

China going for Taiwan would be the worst geopolitical move of the century, potentially worse than Germany's decision to invade the soviet union. They talk about reunification because it's good propaganda and both sides want it to a degree, but doing it forcefully just isn't something China would realistically do unless they really don't like their path of becoming an international trade and manufacturing hub

China seems to be recently building up its forces and putting a lot of money into military. I think it would be foolish to just assume its all for show even if it might be in the end.

And quite frankly, its only geopolitically stupid if they lose. Consequences for this sort of thing usually tend to happen if the conflict is long and drawn out. If the win quickly the consequences would likely be minor.

Post reply on HN