<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: ggreer</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=ggreer</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 18:11:53 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=ggreer" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "LeCun has "zero concerns" about AI wiping out humanity, recent "rogue" incidents"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>No, they explicitly denied it.[1]<p>> …in particular, no specific user data was accessed in order to solve this problem.<p>> Following an investigation, we have confirmed that Buckmaster’s Codex prompts over the two months preceding this announcement and paper on September 8, 2026, could not have influenced the system in any way, including through training.<p>I'm sure some people doubt OpenAI's claims, but Anthropic has also made advances in mathematics using AI. At some point you have to accept that not every single one of these breakthroughs is regurgitating a human insight.<p>If doubters refuse to pick specific cognitive tasks that they'd bet against AIs being able to accomplish in the next 4 years, I don't see how their claims are useful. If AIs are so limited in their capabilities, then clearly there must be some things they'll certainly be incapable of, at least in the short term.<p>1. <a href="https://openai.com/index/navier-stokes-solution/" rel="nofollow">https://openai.com/index/navier-stokes-solution/</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2026 22:36:10 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49958650</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49958650</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49958650</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "LeCun has "zero concerns" about AI wiping out humanity, recent "rogue" incidents"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>By your rules, LLMs & deaf-blind people are not conscious, but self-driving cars are? Also a brain in a vat is not conscious?<p>The real answer is that we don't know if LLMs are conscious, and we don't really know how we'd that figure out. I guess if an AI wrote a philosophy paper on consciousness that had new insights, that might change some minds. But even that would fail to convince most people.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2026 20:04:50 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49957308</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49957308</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49957308</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "LeCun has "zero concerns" about AI wiping out humanity, recent "rogue" incidents"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Is there any specific cognitive task that you'd best against AIs not being able to accomplish in the next 4 years? ChatGPT launched only 4 years ago. Considering the advancements since then, I'm having a hard time coming up with anything. Only two years ago, AIs couldn't tell you how many Rs were in "strawberry". Now they're creating 0-days to get at training data and solving math problems that have stumped humans for decades.<p>Scaling has produced novel capabilities with each larger model, and the rate of new capabilities doesn't seem to be slowing down yet. Even if you think the rate of improvements will slow down, that still means there will be significant improvements beyond what current models can do. Moore's law has slowed down, but modern computers are still much faster than ones from a decade ago. And unless you work at Anthropic or OpenAI, you don't know what the state-of-the-art is capable of. The most advanced publicly available models are months behind what AI labs have, and are deliberately limited to reduce liability.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 04 Oct 2026 19:55:08 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49957235</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49957235</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49957235</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Tesla launches capability to drive away while plugged in after deadly shooting"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I'm not sure where you got that idea. I have surplus 7.62x54r ammunition from the USSR and it still works fine. The only issue with it is that it uses mercury-based primers, which are toxic and corrosive. So I only shoot it outdoors and I clean the bore when I get back home.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2026 21:09:23 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49938635</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49938635</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49938635</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "SpaceX's Starship launching to orbit for first time ever today"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The only way the payload is much lower than 52 tons is if SpaceX is lying about the mass of their satellites. That seems unlikely, as correct masses are required for FAA debris assessment.<p>Each Starlink V3 satellite weighs approximately 2 tons. They use ion thrusters for propulsion, so propellant on each satellite is 50-100kg, not half a ton. The current payload bay can hold around 60 V3 satellites, so they'd launch fewer of them (as they did in this launch) instead of putting partially fueled satellites into orbit.<p>A tower catch and an ocean splashdown require the same amount of propellant. The only difference is when the deorbit burn happens. Yes there will be some boil-off as the ship stays in orbit for longer, but a day in orbit would lose around 0.5% of the propellant. According to the live stream, both the booster & ship were loaded to about 98.5% of capacity. And filling the tanks completely would give them more payload capability, not less.<p>If you need to see a satellite deploy followed by a tower catch to be convinced of their payload numbers, then you're asking for evidence that doesn't exist yet. But I'd be happy to bet on that. How about this: If before December 31st, 2027, SpaceX deploys a payload greater than 50 tons from Starship while recovering both the booster & ship (I assume via tower catch. Fishing out of the water doesn't count.) you pay me $1,000. If that doesn't happen, I pay you $1,000. If you like, we could both choose a charity and the loser donates to the charity of the winner's choosing.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2026 17:33:07 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49897110</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49897110</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49897110</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "SpaceX's Starship launching to orbit for first time ever today"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I don't think that analogy really maps, as nothing else is in those orbits, nor have those orbits ever been used by anyone. Is it really a park if nobody has ever set foot in it? Orbits seem more analogous to claiming land for a homestead. By being the first to stake your claim and do useful work on the land, you become the owner.<p>Also Starlink V3 orbits are at 330–370km, which is below pretty much everything else in space. Atmospheric drag is high enough that without ion thrusters, satellites will deorbit in a couple years. If SpaceX doesn't keep launching stuff, it will self-clean and allow others to use it.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2026 01:31:06 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49886916</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49886916</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49886916</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Nissan's third generation e-POWER powertrain"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This is one big advantage of having a Tesla and using their Supercharger network. I tried using 3rd party chargers a few times. The spotty reliability, annoying apps, & frustrating payment flows made me avoid them. With Tesla's network you just plug the car in. There's really no excuse for other vehicles & chargers being worse. ISO 15118 defines a plug & charge standard, which Tesla implements. Electrify America supports it as well, but vehicles often lack support for it, or require the vehicle owner to activate the feature.[1]<p>1. <a href="https://www.electrifyamerica.com/plug-and-charge/" rel="nofollow">https://www.electrifyamerica.com/plug-and-charge/</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2026 20:08:24 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49883642</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49883642</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49883642</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "SpaceX's Starship launching to orbit for first time ever today"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Today's launch was the 3rd largest payload ever put in orbit (52 tons). Only Skylab (77 tons) and Buran (80 tons) exceed it.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2026 18:42:58 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49882547</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49882547</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49882547</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Nissan's third generation e-POWER powertrain"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>You're talking about a car problem, not an infrastructure problem. The 2022 Leaf has an EPA range of either 149 or 212 miles depending on the model, and only has a 50kW or 100kW CHAdeMO port, which is slow to charge and doesn't allow you to use Tesla's Supercharger network. The battery management system uses air cooling, so charging rates are quickly limited by the pack heating up.<p>Also Nissan has instructed Leaf owners to not use DC fast charging, as doing so can cause battery fires. A recall has been issued, but no fix is available yet.[1]<p>1. <a href="https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2025/RCLRPT-25V655-5278.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2025/RCLRPT-25V655-5278.pdf</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2026 18:02:45 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49881920</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49881920</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49881920</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Nissan's third generation e-POWER powertrain"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>What EV? I have a 2020 Model 3 and in six years I've never had an issue with charging, even when driving around rural Montana & Idaho in the winter. I've never had a supercharging station be out of commission. Sometimes an individual stall or small group of stalls will be offline, but the car tells you which ones are broken so you don't waste time trying to charge at one.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2026 17:37:19 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49881540</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49881540</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49881540</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Toyota is taking the Corolla electric"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The Model 3's suspension was revised a couple years ago, and enthusiasts seem to have stopped complaining. Both cars are within a few seconds on the Nürburgring (7:42-7:44ish), and the Model 3 Performance is faster on Laguna Seca. Both cars need better brakes if you're going to flog them around a track for long periods of time, but that's a pretty common issue with performance versions of sedan/SUV EVs.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 21:19:48 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49850077</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49850077</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49850077</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Allow Carriers on Planes"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>High speed rail is only cost-effective between major cities that are within a few hundred miles or so. Otherwise you don't have enough passengers to recoup the cost of building & maintaining the rail system.<p>For example: Spokane to Seattle is about 230 miles in a straight line, or 280 miles driving. A flight takes less than an hour (not even 40 minutes of which is spent in the air) and costs $80-130 one way. A train traveling 200mph nonstop would take 1 hour 24 minutes. Building high speed rail costs $20-$200 million per mile (the upper end of that is California HSR). If we optimistically assume $20m/mile, constructing the line will cost $5.6b. If all SEA-GEG passengers (677k per year) choose to take rail instead of flying, and we want the project to pay for itself after 50 years, then each ticket will need to cost $165. This also assumes no cost to maintain or operate the rail line.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 16:04:40 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49846398</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49846398</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49846398</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Allow babywearing carriers on planes"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Going back to pre-9/11 security screening would probably save lives. The extra time & hassle required to get through security (and the fact that only passengers can go through) means that some people drive instead of fly. Driving is less safe than flying, so some of those people die in car wrecks.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 14:37:38 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49845278</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49845278</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49845278</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Allow Carriers on Planes"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The rules don't say that you have to hold your baby facing forward, and front-facing baby carriers are also banned during takeoff & landing.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 14:33:05 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49845226</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49845226</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49845226</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Toyota is taking the Corolla electric"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>What about the Model 3 Performance? It accelerates faster than the EV6 GT, has more range, and is several hundred pounds lighter. Cornering ability seems to be similar, as both get 0.92g in skid pad tests.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 01:08:37 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49838984</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49838984</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49838984</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Toyota is taking the Corolla electric"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I got a Model 3 in 2020 and I still don't see anything competitive from other manufacturers. There are so many little things that it does right. You pair your phone with the car, so when you walk up to it and pull on the door handle, it opens. If you're not next to the car and someone else tries to open the door, it's locked. Each driver has their own profile which saves things like UI preferences, acceleration settings, seat position, side mirror angles, climate control, etc. So if my wife was the last person to drive the car and I open the driver's side door, the seat moves to my position. The mirrors adjust to my settings, and so on.<p>Even though my car has the older hardware, the self-driving is far beyond anything else I've used. It makes road trips far less tiring. I basically sit in the driver's seat while it drives from charging station to charging station. I've gone hundreds of miles without touching the steering wheel. Usually I intervene because I want to park in a specific spot, as the car tends to choose spots that are less convenient. Also it likes to park in my neighbor's driveway instead of mine. (The driveways are about 5 feet apart.)<p>The phone app lets you control all kinds of stuff remotely. I like to turn on the climate control before going to the car, that way my kid's car seat won't be uncomfortably warm on a sunny day. You can view the cameras from your phone, lock/unlock the car, open/close the windows, and open the trunk & frunk. And it works anywhere there's cell network connectivity, not just within direct radio range of the car.<p>I'd love it if more cars had these sorts of features, but I don't see it happening any time soon. Tesla seems to be a software company that happens to make cars, while everyone else is a car company that happens to make some software.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2026 00:58:58 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49838911</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49838911</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49838911</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Transit rewards"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>In SF it really depends on which line you're on, and a bit of luck. In my experience the 9 was the worst. I didn't ride that one often, but almost every time I encountered something ridiculous. One time a guy rolled a blunt and started smoking it on the bus. Another time a guy in a wheelchair spilled a bottle of booze that then ran up and down the floor of the bus. I got off early several times when an obviously crazy homeless person got on and started silently staring me down.<p>But even popular commuter routes like the 38 can get pretty dicey. One time a guy was blasting music out of a bluetooth speaker. He had headphones sitting on his neck, so I asked him to use his headphones instead. His response was to get in my face and start yelling, threatening to beat me up. Everyone around us stepped away and ignored us. Apparently the next stop was his, so he got off while threatening to jump me if he ever saw me again.<p>If you take public transit in the bay area regularly, you are almost guaranteed to have some very unpleasant experiences.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2026 16:08:51 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49818219</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49818219</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49818219</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Transit rewards"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Cost per passenger mile for a bus containing 4 people is much higher than for 4 cars, and since road wear scales with the 4th power of axle loading, a bus causes about 1,000x more damage to the road than a car.<p>It seems like the best solution would be to implement registration fees to offset externalities like pollution and road wear, and have congestion fees for when the roads are busy (including for vehicles such as busses). Then let the price signal decide the optimal mix of vehicles on the road. I think if such a system were implemented, the biggest change in behavior would be people taking fewer car trips during peak traffic hours.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2026 15:53:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49817997</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49817997</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49817997</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Seattle Bans Rental Junk Fees"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Pet deposits are allowed, but they are restricted to 25% of the first month's rent and landlords cannot require a deposit if the pet is an "assistance animal" for the tenant.[1] It's unclear what qualifies as an assistance animal. If an assistance animal does cause damage, the property owner must sue for damages. I doubt such lawsuits are common, as the cost to hire a lawyer and sue in civil court is easily thousands of dollars, and compensation is far from guaranteed. Even if you win the case, collecting can be difficult.<p>Also I'm not sure what the new law changes. Since 2016, Seattle has banned charging extra rent for having a pet. Subsection E states: "Other than the pet damage deposit authorized by subsection 7.24.038.A, the landlord may not charge the tenant any fee for keeping a pet."<p>1. <a href="https://library.municode.com/wa/seattle/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT7COPR_CH7.24REAGRE_7.24.038PEDADE" rel="nofollow">https://library.municode.com/wa/seattle/codes/municipal_code...</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2026 18:18:20 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49791159</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49791159</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49791159</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by ggreer in "Uber arbitration award over Emily Normandin-Parker’s death"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Almost every career requires staying on top of new developments to remain competitive. Even mechanics must learn about new systems in vehicles to be able to repair them. Not many people are still meaningfully employed as Model T mechanics.<p>The difference with LLMs is that they are a substitute for more general cognitive skills. Right now they are also a complement (using them increases the productivity of humans writing software), but it's only a matter of time before they improve to the point where they fully substitute. And it seems quite likely that the timeline for that is significantly shorter than my remaining career.<p>If you are confident that there will be specific tasks that LLMs can't accomplish in 2033, I'm happy to entertain such ideas. But considering the current rate of progress, I can't think of anything like that.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2026 16:46:30 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49789722</link><dc:creator>ggreer</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49789722</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49789722</guid></item></channel></rss>