Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | raspasov's comments login

I would describe rescue as:

Whenever I travel to a ___location, the planned return transport fails AND I would eventually be dead without outside human assistance. That’s a rescue.

In your villa example that is correct: your friend helping you is not a rescue. It’s a convenient helping hand. A space station is a different beast though.

If your villa was on a remote isolated island without anyone else on it, it would be closer to the space station but still not exactly the same. The island, depending on its size might have bountiful food/animals you can hypothetically harvest, not to mention attempting to plant and grow some seeds from the hypothetical fruits and vegetables you already have.

Very little of this is realistically possible in a space station like the one we have.


Your villa is totally incomparable to space or a space station.

Hypothetically:

- you can walk outside, hitch a ride home

- fully loaded means there’s electricity and phones? Call a Taxi?

- walk to a near town shop, buy car parts and fix the car if you have the skills

None of those hypotheticals are even remotely possible in space. It’s a bad comparison.


Assuming your 19 year old was smart enough to get into a top ranked program _on merit_ chances are they’ll be fine.


Has anything in the drug testing changed that can affect swimmers?


Russian imports/exports are much more restricted now than 4 years ago.


Did previously a lot of doping come russia? I am curious.


Russia is banned from the Olympics for, among other things, doping.


(Also a Chat GPT4o,x etc user)

Try asking it something actually technologically hard or novel and see what answers you get.

In my experience, it repeatedly bails out with "this is hard and requires a lot of careful planning" regardless of how much I try to "convince" the model to live the life of a distributed systems engineering expert. Sure, it spits out some sample/toy code... that often doesn't/compile or has obvious flaws in it.


Very few people are working on technologically hard or novel things. Those people have always had very special effects on society, and will continue to be special going forward - LLM's aren't going to prevent those people from delivering real value. HN has an absurdly rich concentration of these special people, which is why I like it. And many of them are surrounded by other similarly special people in real life. I only regularly talk with maybe 1-2 people in real life who are even close to that type of special. Even when I was a chemical/electrical/petroleum engineer working closely with other engineers - usually only 1-2 people at each workplace were doing really smart work.

That said, the majority of my friends are doing relatively manual work (technician, restaurants, event gigs, sex work) and are neither threatened by LLMs nor find much use for them.


You are likely not wrong.

Even though I do think that almost any profession can potentially find use for LLMs in some shape or form. My opinion is LLMs can increase productivity and be a net positive the way the Internet/search engines are if used correctly.

To expand on my original comment: All that being said, I think the hype/media cycle overestimates the magnitude of the potential positive LLM effect. You’ll see numbers like 5x, 10x, 100x increase in productivity thrown around. If I have to bet, I would say the likely increase is going to be in the 1x-1.5x range but not much greater.

Most things in the world are not infinitely exponential, even if they initially seem to be.

(Not sure why the downvotes.)


> (Not sure why the downvotes.)

Appreciated! But if we fret about a few downvotes, we're using the forum wrong. Some unpopular views need to be discussed - either because they hold some valuable truth that people are ignorant of, or because discussing them can shine a light on why the unpopular views are misguided. I suspect the downvotes are related to "Very few people are working on technologically hard or novel things" -- many HN users have been surrounded since elementary school by tons of people who do currently work on hard or novel problems, so they understandably think that >5-10% of people do that, when in fact it's closer to maybe 1-in-200. I've been part of social groups who went to high schools with absurd numbers of Rhodes' Scholars and peer groups where everyone in the group can trivially get through medical schools with top marks, receive faculty positions as professors at top-3 universities, found incredible startups through insane technical competence, and still all think they're stupid because they compare themselves to the true 1-in-a-million geniuses they grew up with who are doing research so advanced that it's far beyond their most remote chances of ever having even surface-level comprehension of that research. Their extended social group likely comprises >1% of all Americans working on "hard or novel problems", but since 75% of them are doing it, they have no idea that the real base rate is closer to 1-in-200, generously. They grossly underestimate their relative intelligence vs. the median and grossly overestimate the ability of average people (and explain away differences in outcome to personality issues like "laziness").

There are a surprising number of people from these peer groups on HN. These are the people who will never be threatened by LLM's -- they are capable of adapting to use any new tools and transcending any future paradigm, save war/disease/famine.

> To expand on my original comment: All that being said, I think the hype/media cycle overestimates the magnitude of the potential positive LLM effect. You’ll see numbers like 5x, 10x, 100x increase in productivity thrown around. If I have to bet, I would say the likely increase is going to be in the 1x-1.5x range but not much greater. Most things in the world are not infinitely exponential, even if they initially seem to be.

Yours is a very reasonable take that I wouldn't argue against. I also think it's reasonable that some people think it will be 5x-100x -- for the work some individuals are familiar with it very well might be already, or they might be more bullish on future advances in reinforcement learning / goal-seeking / "search" (iterative re-search to yield deep solutions).

> Even though I do think that almost any profession can potentially find use for LLMs in some shape or form.

I reactively feel this is stretching it for people who travel around just to load/unload boxes of equipment at events/concerts/etc. But the way you worded this is definitely not wrong - even manual laborers may find LLM's useful for determining whether they, their peers, and their bosses are following proper safety/health/HR regulations. More obviously, Sex workers will absolutely be using LLM's to screen potential customers for best mutual-fit and maintain engagement (as with lawyers who own small practices, a large number of non-billable hours goes towards client acquisition, as well as retention). LLM's are not "there" yet for transparent personalized client engagement which maintains the personality of the provider, but likely will be soon with some clever UX and RAG.


> I reactively feel this is stretching it for people who travel around just to load/unload boxes of equipment at events/concerts/etc. But the way you worded this is definitely not wrong - even manual laborers may find LLM's useful for determining whether they, their peers, and their bosses are following proper safety/health/HR regulations.

It's more than that when the LLMs go mutli-modal. A model (or an ensemble) that can hear you talking and see what you're showing it suddenly becomes very useful even for manual labor. Instructions, inspections, situational awareness, to think of few cases; this is a thoroughly unexplored space so far.


As of recently, Docker on MacOS has improved and AFAICT the performance penalty is gone.

Is the problematic corporate Mac an M-series Mac or Intel?

M-series have been great in my experience. I did used to get random full system crashes on Intel Macs which haven't happened in a few years on M1/M2.


I mean the performance penalty is just inherent to how Docker on Mac works. Instead of being a container like on Linux, it’s a virtual machine, which will necessarily be slower.


The difference is absolutely marginal. The main slowdown sources is mounting huge volumes from the host, that's definitely works better with Linux. And emulating x86_64, if your container does not have arm64 build. But if you don't need it, I'd argue that M1 performance will yield faster containers compared to average Intel laptop.


Docker Desktop still sucks at least on my corp mac.


I'd recommend you try OrbStack.


Listing: Cockroach and spider box.

But It Now or Best offer.


JS: deep copy so awesome!!

CLJS: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


Actively meandering in the wrong direction.


Actively deprecating random stuff for no reason



Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

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

Search: