And while you're at it, make your own argument. That's a skill required of any engineer.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48393768

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

I love how well this captures the credibility of zealots and how some won't hesitate to exploit human suffering to push an agenda. The housing crisis is driven by regulation that lowers supply, shaped by greed and cruelty. Turning house designs into slop won't solve anything.

You want to see how AI actually contributes to the housing crisis? Then here's an actual example:

"Rent Going Up? One Company’s Algorithm Could Be Why." https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-r...

> For a while, I tried not going into Nazi allegory when talking about Oracle, but I actually think it does a disservice to not go into Nazi allegory because if I don't use Nazi allegory when referring to Oracle, there are some critical understanding that I have left on the table. There's an element of the story you can't possibly understand. If you had to explain the Nazis to someone who had never heard of World War 2, but was an Oracle customer, there's a very good chance that you would actually explain the Nazis in Oracle allegory. So, it's like: "Really, wow, a whole country?" "Yes, Larry Ellison has an entire country." "Oh my god, the humanity! The license audits!" "Yes, we should talk to Poland about it, it was bad."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79fvDDPaIoY&t=1440s

Furthermore, age verification is being pushed at multiple jurisdictions across the globe. They're trying multiple approaches to get this through and seeing what sticks.

It's also the tired old argument that's constantly raised by encryption ban/backdoor proponents too. How many times do they have to be debunked, ugh.

If you're against the EFF on these kind of issues, it's typically a good time to reevaluate your position.

https://www.eff.org/issues/age-verification

It's like saying we should install Flock cameras everywhere so that we can protect consumers from buying harmful products. Corruption and mass-violation of human rights is all that's ever going to come out of it.

If the goal is to stop predatory companies, why not do so? Oh right, because that was never the goal.

I already have, as have others, but

> It sounds like you think they've made a stable release already?

What's the point if you keep refusing to acknowledge the issue and tossing out theories about how I and others might be wrong, just to see what sticks?

> None of the new code is sent to users yet.

So? The decision to adopt was already made and the code was merged without planning, without considering downstream impacts, and without proper inspection. People who won't read their own code before merging won't read it after. But many of you don't even see this as an issue. So again, what's the point in trying to point all of this out?

Also you yourself said the experiment is over. You can't have it both ways.

> It's a direct translation without relying on major AI decisions.

Because the genie said so? That sounds lacking in scientific rigor, but

> I'm happy to call them cowboys if they make a release with lousy testing.

Oh right, that the test passes is proof that the new code is debuggable, maintainable, architecturally sound, semantically equivalent to the old code, and non-disruptive for downstream users. Apparently testing has leapt centuries ahead in the past two weeks or so.