Hacker News: int3

New comment by int3 in "Ex-FTC boss Khan: break out the handcuffs for AI CEOs, citing 1934 precedent"

int3 — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 03:11:36 +0000

duh? why would you want someone with no experience making decisions?

New comment by int3 in "European alternatives to Google, Apple, Dropbox and 120 US apps"

int3 — Fri, 03 Apr 2026 11:02:44 +0000

the difference is that one of them is actually justified!

New comment by int3 in "A ChatGPT Pro subscription costs 38.6 months of income in low-income countries"

int3 — Mon, 11 Aug 2025 15:53:53 +0000

well, maybe we can spend some of the money we save not subsidizing the third world on better border security

New comment by int3 in "Fish odor syndrome – A rare metabolic condition that makes sweat smell like fish"

int3 — Mon, 31 Mar 2025 01:45:51 +0000

oh so that's what my elementary school classmate had

New comment by int3 in "Judges rule Big Tech's free ride on Section 230 is over"

int3 — Sat, 31 Aug 2024 16:59:19 +0000

The car is following a process chosen by Mercedes' engineers (to go forward when the user presses the accelerator.) The newsfeed is likewise following a mechanistic process driven by user input (they wouldn't be showing misinformation if users weren't uploading and sharing them.)

New comment by int3 in "Judges rule Big Tech's free ride on Section 230 is over"

int3 — Fri, 30 Aug 2024 14:16:10 +0000

Does the algorithm "decide" to show something, or is it operating mechanically, driven by the inputs of the user?

New comment by int3 in "Sourcegraph went dark"

int3 — Tue, 20 Aug 2024 17:28:49 +0000

people can do things for more than one reason

New comment by int3 in "AI crawlers need to be more respectful"

int3 — Thu, 25 Jul 2024 20:17:45 +0000

Shouldn't all sites have some kind of bandwidth / cost limiting in place? Not to say that AI crawlers shouldn't be more careful, but there are always malicious actors on the internet, seems foolish not to have some kind of defense in place

New comment by int3 in "FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't"

int3 — Sat, 29 Jun 2024 21:00:32 +0000

Nope. Assume you have insurance with a one-time fee of $X. It insures against a single kind of event that happens with 60% probability, and pays out $1.6X. So the majority of people are likely to have the event happen to them. The EV of the cost to the insurer is then $1.6X * 0.6 = $0.96X, so the books are expected to balance.

Obviously I'm ignoring variance in this calculation, but you can easily adjust the numbers to give a margin of safety.

New comment by int3 in "FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't"

int3 — Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:30:52 +0000

> People can develop allergies during their lifetime, it's not just something that you're born with.

Sure, but the likelihood of that is low enough that insuring against that isn't worth it for most people

> But my message was about the general principle of insurance being the very thing your comment was against. The situation where the vast majority of people pay some cost of which only a few need to utilise.

No, the principle of insurance is that people pay to hedge against some event that has a reasonable likelihood of happening to them at some point. Whether it's a majority or a minority paying for it is not central to the concept of insurance.

New comment by int3 in "FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't"

int3 — Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:55:41 +0000

People generally don't develop allergies randomly in life. There's no insurance value here.

New comment by int3 in "FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't"

int3 — Fri, 28 Jun 2024 00:21:06 +0000

I think one difference is that there isn't a great alternative option in the case of commercial buildings -- if you have a job in a given building that doesn't accommodate your disability, you can't just go find a different building. But insofar as food is concerned, you could pay more for more carefully-manufactured food, or just cook for yourself

New comment by int3 in "FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't"

int3 — Fri, 28 Jun 2024 00:18:05 +0000

unironically. would love to have those berkeley lectures back online

New comment by int3 in "FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't"

int3 — Thu, 27 Jun 2024 23:43:49 +0000

whether it is smart or not depends on the likelihood of it. do you have numbers?

New comment by int3 in "FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't"

int3 — Thu, 27 Jun 2024 23:37:47 +0000

even if it were 10%, we shouldn't expect 90% of consumers to subsidize the other 10%

New comment by int3 in "FDA warns top U.S. bakery not to claim foods contain allergens when they don't"

int3 — Thu, 27 Jun 2024 23:35:53 +0000

oh please, there are plenty of first world countries without as many retarded regulations

New comment by int3 in "Reverse engineering a software crack"

int3 — Tue, 23 Apr 2024 22:19:22 +0000

seems like crackers could just patch the app code that detects this, no?

New comment by int3 in "Inequalities, convergence, and continuity as "special deals""

int3 — Tue, 14 Nov 2023 15:50:18 +0000

Increased precision typically costs more economically, so I think it's a pretty good analogy... precise physical measurements require specialized equipment, precise floating-point calculations require more computational power, etc

New comment by int3 in "Private equity is devouring the U.S. economy"

int3 — Tue, 31 Oct 2023 04:39:18 +0000

Housing would depreciate too if we didn't have artificial scarcity policies designed to make it an investment. Saying that housing should be an investment because we've designed it to be an investment is circular reasoning.

Re #2: it's obvious that most people aren't the most objective when it comes to their offspring. That's why we should have policies that discourage overallocating resources to an unqualified child of a rich parent.

Finally, "personal property" is a construct of law. Something is yours because society has decided it's yours. If the laws change, and if you can't physically defend your property, then it's not really yours any more, is it?

New comment by int3 in "Private equity is devouring the U.S. economy"

int3 — Tue, 31 Oct 2023 03:08:51 +0000

Uh, none of that means housing has to be an investment. The point of a mortgage is that it helps you buy a house and pay it off over time, nothing more. We don't talk about cars being an investment just because people take out 7-year auto loans.

Moreover, passing on generational wealth shouldn't be a feature we want to make easier. You don't want a to push society in the direction where generational wealth is required to live a good life.