Hacker News: ura_yukimitsu

New comment by ura_yukimitsu in "The future of everything is lies, I guess: Work"

ura_yukimitsu — Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:13:26 +0000

New comment by ura_yukimitsu in "ML promises to be profoundly weird"

ura_yukimitsu — Wed, 08 Apr 2026 16:14:03 +0000

Calling LLMs "bullshit machines" is a reference to a 2024 paper [1] which itself uses the concept of "bullshit" as defined in the essay/book "On Bullshit" by Harry G. Frankfurt [2]. The TL;DR is that LLMs are fundamentally bullshit machines because they are only made to generate sentences that sound plausible, but plausible does not always mean true.

[1]: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Bullshit

New comment by ura_yukimitsu in "AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it"

ura_yukimitsu — Thu, 12 Feb 2026 13:24:35 +0000

> It was essentially trained by us to be like us, it's partly human

I disagree with that, at best it's a digital skinwalker. I think projecting human intentions and emotions onto a computer program is delusional and dangerous.

New comment by ura_yukimitsu in "AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it"

ura_yukimitsu — Thu, 12 Feb 2026 12:45:30 +0000

Are you seriously equating anti-LLM policies to discrimination against actual people?

New comment by ura_yukimitsu in "India's female workers watching hours of abusive content to train AI"

ura_yukimitsu — Fri, 06 Feb 2026 15:55:20 +0000

You're misrepresenting both what the article says and what I wrote.

The article explicitly mentions that the jobs aren't clearly labeled so they couldn't weigh their options beforehand, that concerns raised by the workers are being dismissed by management, and that several workers have developed mental health problems.

I'm not arguing that these women should be "protected" by taking their jobs away or that they can't make their own choices; of course they're weighing their options and deciding accordingly (the article even mentions that some of them decided to leave). But it's not unreasonable to critique a system where the only choices they have are all horrible in (often more than) one way or another.

New comment by ura_yukimitsu in "India's female workers watching hours of abusive content to train AI"

ura_yukimitsu — Fri, 06 Feb 2026 14:51:33 +0000

I really don't think it's fair to minimize someone's struggles just because their situation could be worse. Is only the most miserable person on the planet (by what metric anyway?) allowed to complain about their condition?

I also don't think it's fair to exploit people who are in terrible situations by pushing jobs we don't want onto them, pay them a handful of crumbs, and then say they should be happy with what they get because their neighbor who does another job gets half a handful of crumbs.

New comment by ura_yukimitsu in "India's female workers watching hours of abusive content to train AI"

ura_yukimitsu — Fri, 06 Feb 2026 14:15:25 +0000

It's good that you warned them in advance, but I don't think "there are much worse things they could be doing" really is a reason to discard those who are hurt by this as "snowflakes" and the content they're exposed to as "silly and non-threatening." From what you're saying, there's also a big difference between what you were dealing with and what this article is talking about: in your case it was only still images, and only "regular" porn (and I assume they probably had to monitor every image posted if it was "a long time ago" so overall they were not exposed only to that content); in this case they're reviewing videos content including not only porn but also violence and sexual abuse, that was pre-flagged by an AI so with way less rule-abiding content mixed in.