861–870 of 1001 posts
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>For what? There is no ROI at that price point. There is no monetisation potential. I think your whole argument is based on this being true, but you didn't give much argument about why there is no ROI. 400M USD isn't hard to generate...even a moderate ad engagement lift on X would generate ROI and that's just 1 customer. Imagine going back in time and showing every VC how great the search business will be in 20-30 ye…
That's a red herring because it ignores the part where they could have done the same things spending a tiny fraction of the money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ChatGPT is literally generating billions in revenue. Cursor is the fastest growing company of all time. This lame HN trope of LLMs having no business model needs to die.
HN has turned into the Slashdot of the 2000s. No wireless? Less space than a Nomad? Lame.
Re: Dropbox, from a well known user. It didn't age well and we've been asked not to repeat it because it makes the author with connections to this site's operator look bad.
> 1. For a Linux user, you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem. From Windows or Mac, this FTP account could be accessed through built-in software.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863
the controversy: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27067281
Say what you will about the guy, he kept the training running on time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Never seen HN turned against someone so vehemently, it's as if a group of bots was set lose to criticize a certain individual.
or just maybe, and i know its a crazy idea, a certain individual is objectively an awful person who has done great harm in the world and its subjective if its greater or lesser then the good (imho its far greater harms then any good done but i know that is my subjective view) just because you disagree with a widespread view/opinion does not mean its bots
Can someone enumerate the "great harm" that Elon is doing? I honestly don't see it.
Have you thought of a future where LLM will be fined tune to target advertisment to you? I mean look at search: first iterations of search were pretty simple in term of ads. Then personalized ads came. I wouldn't help but envision the distopia where the LLM will insert personalized ads based on what you are asking for help.
[flagged]
There are many criticisms founded in genuine conflict of. interest, it helps everyone to stick to those.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> TLDR: The status quo elite that have been looting the USA for decades is being replaced by the guy who runs SpaceX and is the most transparent elite we've ever seen. Why is that scarier? The reason why it's scarier is that for those of us who've come to understand Elon, his actions, and his methods better, it's clear that: - he IS "the status quo elite that have been looting the USA for decades" - instead of being…
Huh? Name some better leaders who run more successful EV and space companies. There aren't any! Twitter is as popular as ever, and now xAI appears to be highly competitive.
But yeah sure, Elon is the common problem among all these successes.
He does make outlandish promises and lots of mean tweets though.
Controversial opinion but I think the AI game studio idea is a very good one. Not because I think they will make any money off the games, but dogfooding will lead to so much more improvement than relying on feedback from external customers.
Because 'dogfooding' has worked so well for other products... If you don't get feedback from the people actually playing your game (or using your product), you will never get the improvement you need to help them. You can have the most talented passionate people there are developing a product, but if it's not working for the people you want to sell it to, it's the wrong product. Most tech products are terrible becaus…
The implicit assumption with dogfooding is that more feedback is better, even if that feedback is artificially constructed.
I think the idea here is that foisting one's product onto one's own workers is likely to incur a bunch of additional biases and preferences in feedback. Paying customers presumably use the product because they need it. Dogfooding workers use the product because they are told to do so.