Given all other truly useful things you could implement as well as bug fixes, why did you think that investing time and money on Liquid Glass would deliver useful value to users?

I wonder how much time and money they wasted on something that nobody wanted, cared for, needed or solved any real problem?

Sure, but your list should also include the most fundamental distinction: AI does not know what it is saying, understands nothing, has no real connections to reality and can easily degenerate in all kinds of undesirable directions.

That said, learning APL isn't about learning the symbols any more than learning mathematics is not about learning the meaning of the various symbols it uses. To continue with that parallel, it also isn't about memorizing formulas. It is about using the tools to solve problems and, over time, changing the way you solve problems...now in 3D.

I learned APL in the early 80's and used it professionally for about ten years. The way I think of solving problems is fundamentally different in many ways because of this experience.

This is the case of two people at a company using LLM's extensively for email communications. Over time, the LLM being used by the Boss, has been tuned to interpret emails from the Worker, as being negative, aggressive, inappropriate, etc.

I should add that, before LLM's the Boss was not a writer or reader. In other words, not great at creating or reading written communications. As a result, as soon as LLM's entered the picture, the Boss jumped in head-first and every single email the Boss writes is visibly created by an LLM.

The Death Spiral refers to this effect whereby this situation, through a negative feedback loop, degrades over time. Every Worker email is interpreted in an increasingly negative light, no matter how carefully crafted it might be. The situation got so bad that the Worker got written-up and threatened with firing.

This almost became a perfect embodiment of Plato's Allegory of the Cave. The Boss was, after a few iterations, only seeing the shadows on the wall cast by the LLM effectively trained by the Boss through interaction.

I wonder how much of this might be going on in this brave new paradigm, with the potential of LLM's truly damaging human relations and by, effectively, largely removing the human factor from communications.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48225521

Points: 4

# Comments: 1

I think of it as what happens in the show Survivor, where people sometimes team-up and vote out the strongest players because they perceive them as a threat, rather than taking advantage of them to help the team advance in the game. In other words, it's human nature.

In my experience, the asshole label, when faced with competence comes from people who are incompetent, insecure or, very often, both. I've seen this in action more than once.

When someone who is --to generalize-- one standard deviation more competent than a group comes into that group, they tend to be attacked like white blood cells attack foreign matter. Office politics and culture can be brutal and destructive this way. If everyone is comfortable, professionally non-threatening and at the same relative competence level, all is well. Smooth sailing. Introduce someone significantly better and you have a problem.

Think clearly, correctly and grounded in reality.

Stop voting for the people who have consistently allowed this to happen. We give them a tremendous amount of money. They misallocate it, waste it and allow fraud to happen to the tune of billions.

This has nothing to do with this communist/socialist view of the world that I see emanate from your comment. This is plain and simple: Government incompetence, fraud and theft.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with private industry.

This also has nothing whatsoever to do with unemployment rate. You are not going to take a 57 year old bank teller who was let go and put her to work fixing potholes on the highway.

And the connection to maximizing profits is even funnier. Do you realize that a company that maximizes profits pays more taxes? Do you realize that a person who maximizes profits through higher salaries or investments pays more taxes? Which means that the government has more money to allocate towards fixing the problems you noted?

Politicians enjoy a pile of benefits and privileges that the average citizen has no access to at all.

Simple example: They can lie to you and suffer no consequences. If you lie to them, even a minor lie, you can end up with serious criminal charges.

You took the list as literally applying to average citizens.

You took this part:

"In other words, like any real job by average citizens."

and completely ignored the next sentence:

"They should not be a privileged and protected class."

That's the point.

They are supposed to work for us and represent us, and yet they fly far above us at so many levels it is incredible. This is what students should be demonstrating about. It is destructive and equally corrupt regardless of political party.

In other words, it should be a universal truth (no party exceptions) that politicians should not exist as a class above those who elect them. Simple examples are health insurance, consequences for lies, fully paid lifetime benefits and pensions, etc. This is wrong.

Both for Senators and Representatives:

- Term limits (2 consecutive terms max) - No stock market participation in any form during office - No corporate or PAC contributions - Prison for lying to the public or during the course of their work (hearings, media, etc.) - Serious legal consequences for defamation or libel - No special medical/healthcare insurance, accounts or treatment - Pensions only bases on their own contributions, nothing else - No lifetime pensions or healthcare - This one is tough: Consequences for campaign promises not met (part of no lies) - Consequences for shutting down government - Serious consequences for not balancing the budget or driving meaningful reductions that will result in a balanced budget in short order - No media-related jobs for five years after leaving office - No book deals for five years after leaving office - No movie deals for five years after leaving office - No fancy office anything that costs more than your average Ikea/Walmart office furniture - Severe consequences for illicit enrichment; a bartender cannot come out of Congress a multi-millionaire, period.

In other words, like any real job by average citizens. They should not be a privileged and protected class.

Let's see Europe protect itself. Let's see the Middle East decide if they are a region that wants to support world terrorism or --on their own-- achieve peace. Let's see if China helps anybody.

I am perfectly comfortable with at least a one decade pullback. I see no reason for US citizens to subsidize countries all over the world to the tune of over $80 billion dollars and absolutely burn far more than that protecting Europe and others. Pull that back 100% and let's see what the world looks like. Invest that money internally on real infrastructure (not California bullshit projects that never get done), education, healthcare, housing and so many things we need far more than protecting the universe.

Yeah, I'd vote for that. I am sick un thankless nations always pointing a finger at the US. Let's eliminate that target and see how places like Spain and the UK and others do when they need help and we are busy watching it from across the ocean.

So be it. You are free to believe whatever you wish.

I don't claim the US to be perfect. Not even close. Yet, we cover 70% of Europe's defense (likely more), fund the UN to the tune of billions, etc.

It's 2026. I think it's time for everyone who thinks the US is evil to just step back and be responsible for their own shit. Fine with me. I'd rather invest that money here for infrastructure, education, affordable housing, healthcare, etc. No more miliary bases outside the US. No more funding for NATO or the UN. No more subsidies for dozens of nations.

Kindly show me where I said that "the US are the good guys".

There are no good guys in this crap. The world is a mess. And you cannot do any of this without things getting messy.

As for my opinion: As a US citizen, I would be perfectly fine with the US closing down all military bases in Europe and elsewhere. Bring it all home.

If Europe wants to defend their territory, they should do it themselves. The US funds somewhere around 70% of NATO. We should exit that thankless organization. Countries like Spain can face reality on their own. We can use the money at home. I don't know how much we spend on all the bases around the world. I'd shut them all down. Again, can invest their own citizen's taxes to defend themselves.

I'd say the same about the UN. We are spending billions to support that organization. Why? Let someone else host them, we'll gladly show up and vote.

In other words, if all the US has gained at an international level for what we have done, it's time to stop.

I don't have a problem with this at all. It isn't about being an isolationist. It's about what we are paying for and how we are being taken advantage of.

This is very similar with the situation we had with drugs. We pay for the R&D here and Europe (and others) enjoyed low drug prices because they did not have to pay for it. We subsidized low prices around the world. Now that is largely ending. Drug prices are going up around the world because we are no longer going to be taken advantage of in that domain. If you want the drugs we develop, pay your fair share of the R&D.

Is any of the above simple or perfect in concept and execution? No. Of course not. Name anything in international relations that is. Nobody can. It does not exist. But you certainly can try to do the right thing and end-up people hating you for it. Whereas those who do nothing don't have that problem. Funny how that works.

How do you know that?

You do realize that the Iranian government (whatever remains of it) is actually insisting, as a condition, that their nuclear materials not be removed from the country?

Others have mentioned China as a benevolent actor of sorts. I find this interesting, maybe even laughable. China is not interested in coming to the aid of anyone in the world. I am not saying this to criticize China. I believe this is purely a statement of fact: They don't do that.

If we pulled it forward to modern times, China, for example, would not put it all on the table and lose nearly 500K lives to save Europe in a world war. They exist for one thing, and one thing only: To do business that benefits their nation. And that's it.

Again, not being critical, just stating what I believe to be a fact. I can also say that I envy that focus to some extent. It's "China first" to an extreme level.

OK, so, if we accept my premise: Who in the world would come to the aid of societies in need?

Let's also agree that perfection does not and will note ever exist on this planet. So, insisting on perfect interventions, actions and outcomes is not rational. We are --humanity-- not perfect.

Well, the answer to this is simple. The only nation with the ability and the demonstrated willingness to risk life, limb and treasure is the US. The rest of the American continent cannot and has never taken this role. Europe has self-decimated over the decades in terms of these capabilities. So, they can't. Africa? Asia? Who's left? Nobody.

Without a doubt, the Arab world --or Middle East in general-- has been a complex neighborhood for quite some time. Yet, things have gotten massively worse when a country like Iran sponsors murderous terrorists in the region and --as confirmed by the current conflict-- makes it a point to build-up a Middle-East-Annihilation arsenal of missiles that could have almost no other purpose than to obliterate everything around them and even as far as Europe.

And then you add the potential for some of these missiles carrying nuclear warheads.

And then you add a regime that simply has not been a rational actor.

So, what do you do? Do you wait until they are a nuclear power? Just like we waited for Hitler to come to power and kill millions of Jews and others? How much slack do you give a regime who's publicly stated goals, for decades, have been the complete destruction of others?

Without a doubt, the actions of the last month or so have not been perfect. They will not be. That's just reality. For example, I don't understand how sinking their entire navy, destroying their air force, destroying their anti-aircraft capabilities, some 20,000 sorties and targets later...we still have to make a deal with them to keep Hormuz open.

How does that happen? Drones and missiles, of course. What is remarkable is that you'd think we would have mitigated that danger to the point where the international waters of the strait would no longer be threatened. I don't understand why stupid reporters never ask this question. Well, I answered it right there.

And yet, to go back to the thought: Who else but the US could have even approached setting Iran back far enough to make the neighborhood less of an issue? China? They would never. They have happily been selling Iran weapons hardware and know-how. They do not exist to benefit the rest of the world. China first. That's the policy.

Can anyone imagine just how far worse --horrific, really-- this would be if Iran had gone nuclear in the next few months or couple of years? This would truly be unimaginable. We've already seen that NATO does not seem to be willing to engage and might be largely useless.

So, while not perfect, at this point in time I believe that this is one of those "treating the cancer early" scenarios. Iran was on a straight path to being a nuclear nation run by deranged theocratic lunatics. This, while not ideal, not perfect, not desirable, not pretty, is likely a good thing. Now it has to end with the right outcome, whose minimum definition is to denuclearize Iran. From there, it would be nice to see the wonderful Iranian people get out from under the oppression they have been living under for so long. If you know any Iranians (we have many friends) you know they are actively rooting for the US to succeed and are thankful. Same with Venezuelans, BTW.

I also thought about Tesla's problem, which is interesting: No recognition whatsoever.

This, I think, is critical. If you are in Austin, it is impossible not to see Waymo's driving around seemingly everywhere. You see them, watch them interact, interact with them (crossing the street, etc.) and start thinking "I have to try this".

I have no clue if there are Tesla robot taxi's driving around Austin. Why? Because I can see Waymo's on the road a block away and recognize them due to the very visible hardware stack they carry. Tesla's? They all look the same. no clue what a Tesla autonomous vehicle might look like, much less see them in action and watch them navigate traffic at a distance and close-up.

So, for a few days, the thought was "I have to ride a Waymo" and Tesla did not even remotely own any part of that sentiment.

They have a big problem. It's the lack of non-trivial physical branding.

That's a gross misinterpretation of what "doing business with" means.

The process through which you parked the domains with Google entailed loading a file with the list of domains, after which each one would, in turn, be approved or denied. All 400+ domains were approved.

A few days later I received a cryptic message about unusual click activity on the domains and the Google account I had at the time was shut down immediately without recourse. I visited a few of the pages (not all 400, maybe a dozen) as they were approved to see what they put on them. Of course I did not click on anything. I might be accused of being stupid, but I am not an idiot. Besides, I pretty much knew the income would be a rounding error, maybe a few cups of coffee per year, maybe.

Well, nobody to call, text, email or send smoke signals to. Nothing.

That's when I decided I would never do business with Google. All I use from them is search. That's it. Nothing else. I can't trust them with anything that is business related and anything personally important.

Gmail? No way. I pay for Zoho mail for all the email accounts for my businesses and I am very happy about the product, the service and the isolation from a despotic company that can shut down your life in a microsecond.