China is not going to militarily take over Taiwan. The most likely outcome now is a "three state" China where it joins the fold voluntarily and becomes a puppet state of China. Given the way the world has gone, it's the only rational choice.
Hysteria? Have you listened to Karp? Palantir pushes some pretty shit-tier BI noise to clueless executives (it's actually uproarious the mythology that has built around that company), and this weird creep talks like they're the masters of the universe.
Thiel is another incredibly bizarre creep, and he sits as the chairman of the board. Both are very tightly associated with the Trump crime syndicate and the US government, which increasingly is the world's #1 threat, and should be treated as equally dangerous.
The US is undisputedly the world's #1 threat. Like who do you think is even in the running?
Massive military that has bombed ten or so countries in the past year, overthrown a couple more, threatened close allies such that they're getting blood supplies ready and bombs to remove runways. Enormous nuclear arsenal, all in the hands of self-dealing criminal halfwit pathological liar with malignant narcissism as the country flushes down the toilet. A "Department of War" leader who is a simpleton alcoholic clown who rails off "give me tough guy speeches" that he got from ChatGPT, gloating about blatantly illegal -- both in international and US laws -- war crimes, including murdering people in boats just by rebranding them "narco terrorists". A governing party that increasingly is stocked with INSANE fundy nuts who declare that global warming isn't real because the bible didn't mention it, and who salivate about unleashing armageddon. The country is basically lawless at this point -- a busted plutocracy -- and the securities industry has become farcical it is filled with such grift and absolute lawless fraud.
No one holds a candle to that dangerous nuthouse. North Korea, China, Russia...no one is an iota of a danger that the rogue, war-criming United States of America is.
And the "best" part is that we're entering the era of the worst nuclear proliferation in history because of the utter insanity we've seen in the US. I suspect many "own the libs" Americans aren't going to like what inevitably comes next.
Uh...what? Do you know what an ad hominem is? Bizarre.
I directly described the United States of America as it is today. This is just fact, and to the entire rest of the world, America is a busted idiocracy that represents by far the greatest threat to world peace.
EDIT: Oh forgot to mention that the US is directly and openly involved in political interference in many of its allies. Alberta in Canada is a target of a massive US operation right now. Just about every European country. Which is pretty ironic given that the US is basically a fractured pseudo-country where one half of the country hates the other half, and that by all rights should be split up.
Boy, with friends like these, we'll all hope that China's nukes hit their marks with good accuracy.
The people literally are the position. They wield absolute, unchecked power over the might of the US government. What a bizarre thing to complain about.
Trump could literally end humanity tonight. You understand that, right? This proud-he-passed-a-dementia-test serial liar, felonious rapist was given absolutely, unquestioned control over the world's largest nuclear arsenal by the US public. Utter insanity.
Trump and FoxNews Hegseth could send the enormous US military -- screw good healthcare or education, you've got invisible planes! -- to invade Greenland or Canada or Spain. Tonight. With zero opposition.
There are zero checks or restraints on this criminal empire, and the world is seeing the results. It started internally, and that was a spectacular disaster (lol $2T deficit and spiralling economy) so now it's on to the next distraction after the other. Iran didn't give the boost he hoped for, so wonder what the next target will be. Panama? Cuba? Oh I hear they have the "Shield of the Americas" now and think they have Manifest Destiny over the entire Western Hemisphere.
Neat, but why would you want a clumsy LLM to know what happened with your security system? Things happened or they didn't, and that's what dashboards are for.
Seems like trying to make a need from the tools. My security system front page shows me every event that happened at my house, and I don't have to interrogate it on every happenstance, and I don't see what the value of that is.
>The dialog around ads on HN is extremely low quality
This is kind of an ironic comment given that this whole discussion is about visiting the sites as a paying subscriber.
I pay for the NYT. If I visit without adblockers, the site is absolutely stuffed with obnoxious amounts of advertising. I mean, of course I use adblockers normally, and it's basically a requirement no matter how much you're willing to pay for every product you use.
Because everyone wants to double (and triple- and quadruple- and...) dip. Buy a $2000 TV and you'll likely discover ads on the homescreen, ContentID to sell your viewing habits, etc. They figured "why not?" because someone will always rationalize it.
> It's like buy a $2000 TV and discovering ads on the homescreen, ContentID to sell your viewing habits, etc.
Have you bought a TV recently? This is exactly what is happening already. I had to pi-hole my entire network to get rid of the ads in my "switch source" menu on my Samsung TV that did not have ads when I bought it and for the first 3 years after that.
I only hooked up my Samsung TV to the internet to install one update when I first acquired it, then kept it disconnected. Thanks for the tip--I'll make sure to keep it offline forever now!
>If the reader paid for a subscription to the website they would get an ad-free version.
? Where is this true?
I pay for the NY Times. Logged in to my subscriber account, the front page is 68MB and has a giant Hume band ad filling 1/3 of the screen. Loading an article that contains about 9 paragraphs of text and I have a huge BestBuy banner ad filling the top, and then smaller banner ads interspersed between every paragraph.
That maybe 10KB of text is surrounded by 10MB of extraneous filler downloaded for just this page (not even including the cached content).
People used to all pay for their newspapers. So newspapers had an actual budget apart from ad revenue.
This has largely dried up and nearly all 'newspapers' today need to get their money from ads. Sure, some people subscribe, but it's hardly ever the main income for news organizations (some exceptions notwithstanding, I'm talking about the average news organization here).
On top of that the ad revenue is extremely 'diluted'. Putting an ad in a print newspaper was expensive!.
For an organization who get their main income from ads, tailoring their pages for the few subscribers is hardly worth it.
>For an organization who get their main income from ads
The NYT makes about $2B per year from subscriber revenue. They make about $450M from digital ads over all properties. Obviously not all news orgs are the same, but the lead example of a shitty experience is the NYT, so weird that all of the rationalizations work so hard to diverge.
>tailoring their pages for the few subscribers is hardly worth it
"Tailoring" a digital page to not include ads for subscribers is so laughably trivial that this is a farcical claim. They aren't hand-laying out the content and removing ad upsets it or something. But they don't remove the ads because, gollum style, why shouldn't they force ads on me?
What we're talking about is classic enshittification, and every justification people make up is just cope. Indeed, the fact that I'm a subscriber makes me even more lucrative to advertisers, in a classic catch-22 that completely undoes all of the "just pay and you don't get ads in my invented scenario".
Ok, point taken. I've heard very different numbers for dutch newspapers and blindly extrapolated that to the US. And if the numbers are like that than maybe the numbers I heard about dutch newspapers are bullshit too, who knows!
Militarily, absolutely. Absolutely no one misunderstands this.
It would destroy the US on the worldwide stage, and even internally. Not to mention it absolutely annihilates the American delusion that you're the "good guys". Right now the US is a staggering idiocracy, and is absolutely the most dangerous rogue nation on the planet.
And how utterly pathetic. When the "join us, please, we're so great" fell absolutely flat -- the 51st state nonsense, which is spectacularly unpopular in Canada (in fact, it's significantly more likely for an American to want their state to join Canada than for the reverse) -- now every gun-fellating uneducated American MAGA blowhard sits in their basement and fantasizes how, much like their halfwit rapist leader, they're just going to force it on Canada. Good god, what an absolute collapse to worldwide pariah.
And do Americans realize how close your country is to absolute fracture?
Dude, that isn't sustainable. That is an absolute powder keg where rural, low-density shithole states full of angry, poorly educated alcoholic clowns keep lording over urban, educated Americans. That it has been endured this long is an absolute mystery.
The coming decade is going to see the worst nuclear proliferation in history -- courtesy of the spectacularly stupid Trump and his MAGA misfit clowns -- and the end result is going to be some mushroom clouds in American cities. And sadly it won't be the rural garbage states like Oklahoma, it'll be American cities that never wanted any part of this idiocracy.
> Dude, that isn't sustainable. That is an absolute powder keg where rural, low-density shithole states full of angry, poorly educated clowns keep lording over urban, educated Americans. That it has been endured this long is an absolute mystery.
At some point, the mystery to me feels how are american people so tolerant of so many bad decisions which are net negative (like really bad) long term as well too.
Could such tolerance be provided to perhaps have some short term losses/accomodations to better suit the economy and people's lifestyle to enrich it long term?
Where was the tolerance for those sectors?
Things didn't have to go down this way for America until literally quite recently. America and heck, even the rest of world have their own problems but it feels like stacking one problem after another as to what america is doing and America was given good cards. America was the global superpower and nothing else really came close and it could've cozied up to Europe,Australia,India, Japan, SK and african countries to battle chinese influence but what it has done is actually backstab these very nations that they are more opening up to china.
I'm not "the left". I'm some guy whose politics lean centrist to even conservative at times (particularly on crime and immigration). If you need to pop off and justify being trash by pointing to one comment and vilifying an entire political lean, well that's just intellectual garbage. You realize it convinces no one, right?
Further, what irony. The MAGA movement, empowered by angry, uneducated rural America, only has hate as their concern. They are willing to tear everything down if it serves the goal of getting even at those uppity libs. Absolutely nothing Trump and his crew of plastic-faced, incompetent criminal clowns does anything to improve the lives for shithole states like Oklahoma (50th out of 50 on education, but their head of education spent his time attacking NY and California and buying Trump bibles...good god, what a pathetic idiocracy), but he causes pain for "the cities" so that's good enough for them.
When a country has that sort of voting, it's time to move on. The US should have fractured years ago -- Texas has openly talked secession repeatedly, but the moment a "blue state" does the whole indivisible thing becomes paramount.
No one has believed the US are "good guys", probably ever. 9/11 was met with many celebrations across the 3rd world.
America's power has never been greater. In the 60s we had low level paramilitary street insurgencies. American politics are deliberately designed to be un-actionable by the public and opinion is irrelevant.
European countries and their governments are satrapies that we allow a limited independence to. If they try to step too far out of line they will find their government collapses. We did this to Australia at Pine Gap in the 70s and have a whole word for it "color revolution"
It definitely isn't prevalent, and usually is for "feature" pieces (like an expose on the Washington Post back when they were a real newspaper), along with product pages.
Apple uses it for their various pages, and it is legitimately annoying-
Firstly, tl;dr; is a very real thing. If the user asks a question and the LLM both answers the question but then writes an essay about every probable subsequent question, that would be negatively overwhelming to most people, and few would think that's a good idea. That isn't how a conversation works, either.
Worse still if you're on a usage quota or are paying by token and you ask a simple question and it gives you volumes of unasked information, most people would be very cynical about that, noting that they're trying to saturate usage unprompted.
Gemini often does the "Would you like to know more about {XYZ}" end to a response, and as an adult capable of making decisions and controlling my urges, 9 times out of 10 I just ignore it and move on having had my original question satisfied without digging deeper. I don't see the big issue here. Every now and then it piques me, though, and I actually find it beneficial.
The prompts for possible/probable follow-up lines of inquiry are a non-issue, and I see no issue at all with them. They are nothing compared to the user-glazing that these LLMs do.
What you describe is not quite what they are doing, they are adding nudges at the end of the follow-up question suggestions. For instance I was researching some IKEA furniture and it gives suggestions for followup, with nudges in parenthesis "IKEA-furniture many people use for this (very cool solution)" and at the end of another question suggestion: "(very simple, but surprisingly effective)". They are subtle cliffhangers trying to influence you to go on, not pure suggestions. I'm just waiting for the "(You wouldn't believe that this did!)". It has soured me on the service, Claude has a much better personality imo.
No, I don't use OpenAI products. Sam Altman is a weird creep and the company is headed into the abyss, so it isn't my cup.
However the original complaint was about continuation suggestions, which are a good feature and I suspect most users appreciate them. If ChatGPT uses bait or leading teases, then sure that's bad.
Gemini does the same thing. For every question it looks to extend the conversation into natural follow-up questions, always ending a response with "Would you like to know more about {some important aspect of the answer}?"
And...I don't see it as a bad thing. It's trying to encourage use of the tool by reducing the friction to continued conversations, making it an ordinary part of your life by proving that it provides value. It's similar to Netflix telling you other shows you might like because they want to continue providing value to justify the subscription.
My impression is that Gemini does it in a quite natural way. It answers your questions, and then suggests possible related questions that you might ask, which I find useful.
But ChatGPT feels extremely baity. Like it doesn't answer your question, but only 80% of it, leaving the other 20% on purpose for the bait. And then when you ask the second question it answers with another incomplete fact leaving things for the bait, and so on.
As an analogy, it's as if when asked for the seasons of the year, Gemini said "spring, summer, autumn and winter, do you also want to know when each season starts and ends, or maybe they climate?" and ChatGPT said "The first three seasons are spring, summer and autumn. The fourth one is really interesting and many people don't know it, would you like to tell me about it?" It's an exaggeration, of course, but in complex questions it feels to me exactly like that. And I find it so annoying that I'm thinking of canceling my subscription if it keeps behaving that way.
> Gemini does the same thing. For every question it looks to extend the conversation into natural follow-up questions, always ending a response with "Would you like to know more about {some important aspect of the answer}?"
If the aspect of the answer is important, wouldn't it be better just not to skip it?
> And...I don't see it as a bad thing. It's trying to encourage use of the tool by reducing the friction to continued conversations, making it an ordinary part of your life by proving that it provides value.
To me, it just adds friction. Why do I have to beg and ask multiple times to get an answer they already know I'm looking for but still decide to withhold? It's neither natural nor helpful. It's manipulative.
> It's similar to Netflix telling you other shows you might like because they want to continue providing value to justify the subscription.
It's not the same, because Netflix doesn't hide important movie sequences from you behind a question "If you like, I can show you this important scene that I just fast forwarded."
Groan. This is performative outrage and it's just boorish. The other person noted that ChatGPT uses bait-type continuations (Gemini and Claude do not), and sure that is a problem, but your reply is just noise. Beg? Christ.
There is utterly nothing wrong with AI engines offering continuation questions. But there's always something for people to whine about.
Humans do not want to ask a question and get a book in response. They just don't. No one, including you, wants such a response. And if you did get such a response I absolutely guarantee, given this performative outrage, that you'd be the first to complain about it.
"Why do I have to beg and ask multiple times to get an answer they already know I'm looking for but still decide to withhold?"
Performative with zero correlation with the actual topic at hand, but purposefully using ridiculously leading language to bait the gullible (which apparently includes you). It has nothing to do with a different opinion, it's someone choosing a polarised position and then just streaming nonsense to support it.
And I mean, then I looked at the rest of their comments on this site and it all made sense and was perfectly on brand. Facebook-tier rhetoric.
So maybe you should save white knighting for trolls?
EDIT: the troll is now opining that these are LLM-generated. Good god.
I'm pretty sure the last two llm_nerd's comments were AI generated.
What I am not sure about is if it was just laziness or a subtle prank showing how AI can be used to manipulate users to more interaction in a Facebook way.
Why do you think these are exclusive choices? You are gullibly white knighting for an obvious troll. Their other reply to you betrays that they're just a noisemaker, and you're dutifully carrying water for them.
Nah. Their reply was far more nuanced than your weird gaslighting of "you don't have your own opinions! You're being trolled by the person you agree with!"
I have no idea what your "opinion" is here. You ran in to defend someone, bizarrely, and you keep yipping about how you're being gaslit. Bizarre stuff.
Wait, maybe you've been an LLM all along!
Anyway, I think I'm done with you, so hope you have a good day. Go back and reply with the alt, after consulting the "slop machine". :)
The line between, "You knew I wanted you to do that, and you didn't, so you could ask me if you could, to increase engagement/token use," and, "No, that's completely extraneous, I don't want to do that at all," is razor-thin (tantamount to nonexistent). Either it takes time and energy to determine if the suggestion is actually useful, or it's annoying to see because I will always have my own idea of what I want to happen next (if at all) that it rarely hits on.
Anyone who has the same perspective sees it as a bad thing. There are at least 10 of us.
>It's trying to encourage use of the tool
Don't fracking do that, either the tool is useful or it isn't.
Apple's hardware does not support FP8 (neither the ANE NPU, or the new "neural accelerator" tensor cores), though the most recent variant supports INT8.
reply