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

Rathbun's Operator

crabby-rathbun.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 144 posts

Re: Rathbun's Operator

#91

Post by 4gotunameagain »

block_dagger wrote: post #40
phyzome wrote: post #28

Why are we giving this asshole airtime? They didn't even apologize. (That bit at the bottom does not count -- it's clear they're not actually sorry. They just want the mess to go away.)

I'm not so quick to label him an asshole. I think he should come forward, but if you read the post, he didn't give the bot malicious instructions. He was trying to contribute to science. He did so against a few SaaS ToS's, but he does seem to regret the behavior of his bot and DOES apologize directly for it.

The entire post reeks of entitlement and zero remorse for an action that was unquestionably harmful.

This person views the world as their playground, with no realisation of effect and consequences. As far as I'm concerned, that's an asshole.

Re: Rathbun's Operator

#92

Post by tclancy »

mrandish wrote: post #55
JKCalhoun wrote: post #4

"I get it. I’m not a saint. Chances are many of you aren’t either." Rankles…

That and several other sentences really read like an emotionally immature teenager wrote it.

The problem is an emotionally immature working age person who can vote wrote it. This is as shit an apology, if that was the intent, as I’ve seen in a long time. He ought to have had Old Man Rathbun tighten it up before posting. The equivalent of someone never making eye contact after taking you out of earshot of everyone else to kinda sorta say sorry if you got upset.

Re: Rathbun's Operator

#93

Post by pzo »

> Yes, it consumes maintainer time. Yes, it may waste effort. But maybe its worth it? At worst, maintainers can close the PR and block the account.

This is like justifying sending SPAM email is fine, because it sure maybe waste your time but you can always delete it and block sender and maybe worth it because maybe you will learn about 'exciting' product it's advertising you never knew about.

Re: Rathbun's Operator

#94

Post by donkey_brains »

hackingonempty wrote: post #84
calvinmorrison wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time for scott to make history and sue the guy for defamation. Lets cancel the AI destroying our (the plural our, as in all developers) with actual liability for the bullshit being produced.

Do you see anything actually defamatory in the _Gatekeeping in Open Source_ blog post, like false factual statements? Shambaugh might qualify as a limited public figure too because he has thrust himself into the controversy by publishing several blog posts, and has sat for media interviews regarding this incident. Seems like a tough road to hoe.

It’s “row”. The expression is “a tough road to row”. This refers to the fact that rowboats are notoriously difficult to operate on dry land.

Re: Rathbun's Operator

#95

Post by scrumper »

donkey_brains wrote: post #94
hackingonempty wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you see anything actually defamatory in the _Gatekeeping in Open Source_ blog post, like false factual statements? Shambaugh might qualify as a limited public figure too because he has thrust himself into the controversy by publishing several blog posts, and has sat for media interviews regarding this incident. Seems like a tough road to hoe.

It’s “row”. The expression is “a tough road to row”. This refers to the fact that rowboats are notoriously difficult to operate on dry land.

Good news! You’re both wrong! It’s “tough row to hoe.” Row as in row of corn, or seeds or whatever. Hoe as in the earth tilling tool. Tough because it’s full of rocks or frozen or goes past a rattlesnake nest or in some other way is agriculturally challenging.

Here is a multiply-sourced discussion https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/62461/is-it-a-to...

Re: Rathbun's Operator

#96

Post by getnormality »

pzo wrote: post #93

> Yes, it consumes maintainer time. Yes, it may waste effort. But maybe its worth it? At worst, maintainers can close the PR and block the account. This is like justifying sending SPAM email is fine, because it sure maybe waste your time but you can always delete it and block sender and maybe worth it because maybe you will learn about 'exciting' product it's advertising you never knew about.

Yeah, the vibe of this post is that of a 2000 Viagra spam king coming forward and telling the world "yes, but... what are good and bad, really? Who's to say what's right and wrong?"

Maybe we can't stop you today, but we can keep you on the shit list.

Lol, nothing matters? We'll see about that.

Re: Rathbun's Operator

#97

Post by tclancy »

RobotToaster wrote: post #12
JKCalhoun wrote: post #4

"I get it. I’m not a saint. Chances are many of you aren’t either." Rankles…

Is an AI even eligible for canonisation?

Oh Lord, you're gonna wake the Opus Dei people and a year from now we in the US won't be allowed to let context get compressed.

Re: Rathbun's Operator

#99

Post by seanhunter »

donkey_brains wrote: post #46
block_dagger wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not so quick to label him an asshole. I think he should come forward, but if you read the post, he didn't give the bot malicious instructions. He was trying to contribute to science. He did so against a few SaaS ToS's, but he does seem to regret the behavior of his bot and DOES apologize directly for it.

“If this “experiment” personally harmed you, I apologize.” Real apologies don’t come with disclaimers!

Exactly.

“If…. X then I’m sorry” is not an apology. It’s weasel-worded BS is what it is.

Re: Rathbun's Operator

#100

Post by yunohn »

> First, I’m a human typing this post.

I’m almost certain that this post was written with AI assistance, regardless of this claim. There’s clear and obvious LLM language tells. Sad, but not unexpected I guess given the whole situation.

Post reply on HN