Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | pacerier's commentslogin

re "agree with"; You sound like a moron. How much $ are AI researchers who have dedicated their life to it gonna make by shorting AI? If you can't even solve this much then you don't have well-rounded intelligence. let alone be an AI researcher.

Also, do you even know what General mean? Gemini can't even tell me what time the library is open today, while even a 3y kid can. So much for "accurately".

If agi is coming, or even another ai as overwhelming as chatgpt is to its prior age, Then investing in all those companies is the Last thing to do. since they'd be leapfrogged by what's coming.

By investing in them one declares that there are no leapfrogs coming. Aka no agi, or even anything close to 10x chatgpt.

With that therefore, the battlefield shifts to being the best middleman. hence all those senseless amounts of money thrown around. For the masses will no longer need to personally seek out God Altman for their top oracling needs, and so someone can come between God and man, capture all value like microsoft did to ibm, and use it to compete building a new God (read: new scam). Rinse repeat.


Indeed, the Americans have a very weird ruler for respect, which measures solely by power and sex (anything else beyond this two you have to wax wordy essays to convince of its value and still have dubious success) due to its original sin, crossing oceans and expanding westwards for its own sake, fueled by raw sex and power, be it brutes, scientists, farmers, mormons, evangelicals, and missionaries, then they teach their children the same, who teach their children the same.

Orphans and imports don't escape. Even those that are not born here (eg Musk), are eventually taught by society to do the same.

Zuckerberg and friends don't just want to chill on the beach: They want to 0wn it. A common property, then redefine it as "obviously not common", at the expense of others, so that no one else can chill on the beach, unless you provide compensation, for obviously infringing upon their rightful rights duh.


The link however isn't informative since "independent" can mean its opposite. Along with every other word in the article.

We are after all literally talking about the guy who called openai "open"ai? Even your kid knows that none of the words used need make any sense.


Why uber drivers only? They are certainly pretty high up the comfort ranks—there's an enormous distance from the uber driver just to the food delivery guy with an ebike.

(the latter isn't doing all too bad either compared to many others still alive)


The branding is all you need to know about his vision: "Open"AI..


Buffet is set apart and exceptional because he understood exactly what it takes to trick everyone into thinking he is a good man. (btw that helps his stock too)

Now that he's gonna go soon (and having just a dozen more human gatherings and dinners left).. we can see that he fully doesn't give half an ounce of fuck after having received in full what he was after.

After much show, Buffet's "charity" money got simply inherited by his kids just as it was planned all along! (taxfree too, you plebs!)

The billionaires that care about the world are like Larry Page, tho still so evil.


"Exception"? but of course! Those two are the putin-level ones singlehandedly pwning the charts since 1997 after the reign of Getty Oil / Japanese / Walmart.

They are the literal sensei of Zuck the greenhorn and friends. So exceptional that the world thinks they're the exception.


+1 Cool point, that many are "scams" that don't actually sell what they write.

Yet seems it's still true after ignoring all scams! (eg 19 oz dri-duck, 27 oz siccup, 33 oz eddie-bauer)

[what more, I wonder if that's true too for 0.5 + any floz]


The inverse is "you cant". I'd suppose if a number is as random as eg 49oz, then you wouldn't find a consumer brand willing to market such a product. Since they could easily have made a 48oz or 50oz bottle?

Why go out of your way making a 31oz bottle for sale when one could have made it 32oz to increase its demand by 2x/10x/99x?


Purely speculating, but a few factors come to mind. People want water bottles in a variety of sizes and shapes. The precise amount of water held may not be a primary consideration for all consumers. Design aspects such as grip ridges or handles can affect the volume of water that can be held. Maybe a design starts as a simple 32oz cylinder but after the volume is shaped, 3oz of volume has been removed. Now it's a 29oz bottle.

I imagine that the design of the bottle comes first in many cases. A bottle is made that can be used / stored / handled in a particular way and with whatever features. There may be an intent that it will hold "about" some amount of water, but it might not be worth tweaking the design further to get the volume to a specific number.


I'm not sure where the denigration is?

> to work a lot of lower wage

> all the American workers were pretty lackadaisical, while the Mexicans worked pretty hard

Truth


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: