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

This! Any LLM provider that monitors chat/api history for ‘abuse’ towards the model is considering using user data for training.

An Effective Altruism ethos provides moral/ethical cover for trampling individual privacy and property rights. Consider their recent decision to provide services for military projects.

As others have pointed out, Claude was trained using data expressly forbidden for commercial reuse.

The only feedback Anthropic will heed is financial and the impact must be large enough to destroy their investors willingness to cover the losses. This type of financial feedback can come from three places: termination of a large fraction of their b2b contracts, software devs organizing a persistent mass migration to an open source model for software development. Neither of these are likely to happen in the next 3 months. Finally, a mass filing of data deletion requests from California and EU residents and corporations that repeats every week.


Maybe I'll use the remainder of my subscription time to help improve Void. It's already pretty good.

https://voideditor.com/

https://github.com/voideditor/void


These are extraordinary claims for a rapidly evolving field with a huge breadth of intended uses and technologies.

Here are a few questions that should be part of an evaluation of the Parachute platform to pressure test the claims made on the website and this post: 1) How many Parachute customers have passed regulatory audits by CMS, OCR, CLIA/CLAP, and the FDA? 2) What high quality peer-reviewed scientific evidence supports the claims of increased safety and detection of hallucinations and bias? 3) What liability does Parachute assume during production deployment? What are the SLAs? 4) How many years of regulatory experience does the team have with HIPPA, ISO, CFR, FDA, CMS, and state medical board compliance?


This is a good question. Parachute is not a certification body so we do not help you pass audits. Instead we help with internal decision-making surrounding the implementation of AI tools. We also help hospitals keep track of why decisions we made and who made them to produce to regulators and litigators in the future. Parachute does not assume any liability during production deployment.


I canceled my Windsurf subscription. I had/have no interested in supporting Cognition/Devin; the recent comments by Scott Wu to the Windsurf team was the motivation I needed to move to zed/claude code.

If you're a current Windsurf customer, I hope you consider an alternative product and migrate quickly.


Ditto. I've spent a few hours with Kilo Code over last few days. It seems to have something solid to work with. Zed feels really nice, but I haven't quite found the entry angle for working with my stuff just yet.


Can you provide a single high quality (randomized) study demonstrating GLP1 therapeutics are 'incredibly detrimental to [your] longevity and quality of life'?

Consider the type of confounding that occurs in studies of people losing a lot of lean mass: cachexia, restriction to bed, famine.

Traditional weight loss methods have not shown the magnitude of survival benefits wrt cardiovascular disease, joint pain, diabetic complications. Exercise is wonderful, but as a public health intervention it is not sufficient.

If anyone looks at the totality of the high quality GLP1 clinical evidence and concludes these drugs are going to cause a net reduction in longevity and quality of life, then they should step back and assess their process for evaluating information.


Exercise is a public health intervention that actually works in improving health. It may not work to create actual weight loss, but it does improve things like blood pressure regardless.


The IRB would not be the correct office for a HIPAA violation, unless it was an informed consent form for a research study.

Most hospitals have a compliance office where this type of issue would be handled.


Yeah, the IRB isn't even within spitting distance of a HIPAA issue. They're entirely different things, handled by different regulatory agencies, and administered in different parts of a hospital (if a hospital even has an IRB, as most don't, since most aren't research institutions), overseeing different activities.

If someone called my hospital's IRB to "school them" on a HIPAA violation, I can't even imagine what their response would be. I mean, I'm sure it would be polite, but it's not like they'd start hand-holding the lady on how to file complaints - they wouldn't know, themselves. It's only one step up from calling the cafeteria services people.


Sorry, should have been more clear. The case where she called the IRB was where the office completely messed up the consent process -- told her to disregard the first page of the consent, which was included in the package and included items that were directly relevant, and also didn't include materials referenced in the consent. Note, this was in a research/teaching hospital, where the consent notice includes consent for students to participate in the procedure, so that's why she called the IRB -- and they were very interested to hear what she had to say ...


For a specific definition of "handled".


Hospitals take compliance issues very seriously; the incentives are skewed highly in one direction.

Consider it an extension of "HR is there to protect the company, not you." Compliance is there to protect the hospital, not the individual employee that may have erred.

As long as they make a good faith effort to act on the complaint, they themselves are protected from liability. Whereas if they don't act, they open themselves up to enormous liability, on behalf of a replaceable peon - I mean, on behalf of a highly respected staff member.


Health insurance discrimination using genetics illegal (GINA), but life insurance and long-term care insurance is not.


How do you anonymize an individual's DNA dataset (600k-900k DNA markers)?


There are two prominent examples of antitrust/monopoly problems in the U.S. real estate market: MLS and dual agency. The MLS seems to be complicit in forcing home sellers into paying higher buyer agent commissions: https://therealdeal.com/national/2019/05/22/doj-demands-core...

With consolidation of real estate brokerage firms, many home buyers may have overpaid due to a single firm representing both home seller and buyer, known as dual agency: https://therealdeal.com/2019/05/01/houlihan-lawrence-fails-t...

There is a third issue of large private equity firms buying large volumes of houses that may, in the future, warrant an antitrust investigation.


I agree that being forced into 6% commission regardless of the effort it took to buy/sell your house is a problem, I don't think that extra few percent is what's pricing people out of buying a home.


The effective cost implications are more likely 10-12% at each sale. A seller will try to increase the price of the house to cover these commissions.

Your comment is focused on buying a home, but there can be dramatic consequences for home owners, the stakeholders forced into paying both agents.

When a seller has little equity and a poor housing market, exiting a primary mortgage can be financially impossible. A recent survey found a large fraction of the US can't handle a surprise $400 expense. So the follow-on effects of these commissions are not trivial for a large swath of the country.

I also agree that depending on location (looking at you SF metro) there are much bigger factors, e.g. constrained supply, inflating home prices.


Just so you know, that "$400 expense" survey has been widely misreported: https://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2019/apr/19...


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

Search: