611–620 of 672 posts
Remarkable that an official White House plan uses the term “America” instead of United States of America.
Nothing new. There is the MLB World Series [1], World Wrestling Entertainment and many others that don't have anything to do with the "world". [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series
Important follow-up page to the US AI Action Page: "PREVENTING WOKE AI IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT" https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/prev... > In the AI context, DEI includes the suppression or distortion of factual information about race or sex; manipulation of racial or sexual representation in model outputs; incorporation of concepts like critical race theory, transgenderism, unconscious bias,…
It's worth mentioning because the AI developers have been using alignment training to make AI's see the world through the lens of intersectionality. That ranges from censoring what those philosophies would censor to simply presenting answers like they would. Some models actually got dumber as they prioritized indoctrination as "safety" training. It appears that many employees in the companies think that way, too. Mos…
2025 America, where we can't handle the radical pushing of thought by Heinlein in the late 1950s. Unbelievable.
Any Government comment periods going forward I will be asking if the government agency made sure AIs used were not trained on Heinlein or any discussions relating to him to ensure that 'huge chunks of America's desire to exclude trans and to make sure our AIs are the best possible AIs and don't have extremist 1950s agitprop scifi trans thought thinkers like Heinlein included.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really don't understand HN's love affair with nuclear. Uranium mining produces significant toxic waste (tailings and raffinates). Fuel processing produces toxic waste, typically UF6. There is some processing of UF6 to UF4 but that doesn't solve the problem and it's not economic anyway. Fuel usage produces even more waste that typically needs to be actively cooled for years or decades before it can be forgotten abou…
Wow. So you really know nothing about the technology and are just spreading fear. The Chernobyl exclusion zone is mostly safe for people now outside of the fact that Russia is current bombing Ukraine. The issue with cleanup at Fukushima Daichii is one of money and political will, not one of technology. We've had the ability to clean up nuclear accidents since the 1950s. Also, the future of power is increasingly looki…
> The issue with cleanup at Fukushima Daichii is one of money ...
Yes, about a trillion dollars. That's the point.
As for technology, I believe the removal of fuel rods and irradiating sand bags has only begun (with robots) in the last year. I don't believe they've fully mapped out what needs to be removed. It's not just the fuel but also the structure, such as the concrete pedestal the reactor was on (and melted through to).
Otherwise, you kinda make my point: hand waving away serious and expensive disasters with fervor bordering on the religious to essentially dismiss me as some kind of heretic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US has long since exhausted it's "easy" oil/gas reserves. Yes, there's tons more down there, but it's increasingly hard to get to. Lots of extraction methods only make sense when the price for oil is above some amount. If the rest of the world standardizes on solar+battery, demand for oil goes down, and so will the price. Which in turn makes US-produced oil not cost effective to extract, and domestic energy produ…
There are a great many assumptions in this argument, and I'm not sure they stand up well to examination. 1) "We're out of easily extractable oil" maybe, but I've heard it before and technology does have a way of marching forward. 2) "Rest of world's oil demand will drop" is possible but certainly not happening today and far from certain. 3) "Then Oil prices will plummet in the US Domestic market" is far from a sure t…
This is suicide: > We need to build and maintain vast AI infrastructure and the energy to power it. To do that, we will continue to reject radical climate dogma and bureaucratic red tape, as the Administration has done since Inauguration Day. Simply put, we need to “Build, Baby, Build!”
you can figure out with math, climate change is solvable with tech advancement. also the US has pretty clean energy, and likely always will because of fear from future administration changes. one should be more worried about china or india polluting than the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is quite a lot of easy to find information on the web that shows that the US spends twice as much per capita than our European peers and we have worse outcomes, not just on average, but worse outcomes comparing similar economic demographics, including wealthy Americans. We spend $5T a year on health care, or a comparative waste of over $2.5T a year. Was just listening to this on NPR this morning: https://www.np…
Sorry, let me clarify: the fantastic claim is "AI is already better at diagnosis than physicians in most cases."
Is AI better than most physicians for diagnosis ? I doubt it, and I doubt that there have been any real studies as the area is so new and changing.
My personal experience ? I am actually quite impressed, and I am an AI skeptic. I have fed in four complex scenarios that either I or someone close to me was actually going through (radiology reports, blood and other tests, list of symptoms, etc) and got diagnosis and treatment options that were pretty spot on.
Would I say better ? In one case (this was actually for my dog), it really was better in that it came up with the same diagnosis and treatment options, but was much better at providing risks and outcome probabilities than the veterinarian surgeon did, which I then verified after getting a second opinion. My hunch that this was a matter of self interest, not knowledge.
In two other scenarios, it was spot on, and in the fourth case it was almost completely spot on except for one aspect of a surgical procedure that has been updated fairly recently (it was using a slightly more old fashioned way of doing something).
So, I think there is a lot of promise, but I would never rely solely on an AI for medical opinions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
High functioning psychopaths can live perfectly ordinary lives regardless.
I'm not worried about the psychopaths in this scenario, I'm worried about their victims
[1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/the-neuroscien...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well just look at the existing propaganda machines online and how annoyingly effective they are
Be specific. "Well just look at " is a horrible way of discussing. And about your thought: I disagree. When I look at those online places, I see echo chambers, trolls and a lack of critical thinking (on how to properly discuss a topic). Some parts might be artificially accelerated, but I don't see propaganda couldn't be fought. People are just coasting, lazy, group thinking, being entertained and angry.
Propaganda is less about what it says, but more about how it makes people _feel_.
If you get the feels strong enough, it doesn't matter what you say. The game is over before you start.