Why? What's the cutoff point of length that you would accept? If they'd used AI to artificially increase the length of their content, would you be happier?
My delivery could have been better. It was half satire and half a jab since it’s a self promoted post pointing out AI slop without much thought behind it. Even if human written it carries probably even less weight than an AI slop side project.
To write such quick note about AI slop a few days after they had a show hn with something that looks a bit like AI slop amused me.
Not sure what your story has to do with the discussion at hand. On average people do not beat the market, the market can be irrational longer than you are solvent but also most people probably have not done any modeling and so these are really feelings and not real economic bets.
Your statement was deciding to do something based solely on the fact that someone else advised them not to do that. So I presented the same scenario with the same logical process.
It isn't valid. It's being a contrarian, and not the outgrowth of some logical process.
No my statement was the usual joke that it’s always best to do the opposite of the herd. Once everyone is buying beanie babies the market is probably getting saturated. With all these bubble comments on HN I think it’s very much the same.
Is there a bubble? Probably. Is it going to pop, probably not.
I have long been a big proponent of micropayments. I wish more news sites tested it out. Heck any kind of site, don’t bother me with a notification that I am using an adblocker, just ask in same pop up for me to pay $0.1 to view the page or whatever the market rate is.
Am I the only one perplexed why folks find this stunning or meaningful. While LLMs are novel and different in that the subscription gives you access to compute, it does not feel foreign from the subscription, free or paid, landscape. I cannot recall many (if any?) companies that would freely let you use compute, private internal APIs or anything similar just because you have a login. Maybe I come from a different era of tech but it seems both reasonable and not surprising.
Why now? It would not surprise me that this was simply an after thought and once it hit critical mass (opencode) they locked it down.
But shouldn’t search be responsible for reducing or at least ranking the results in such a way that no matter how many results you find what you are looking for in the top N?
Using a hybrid of traditional and semantic is so trivial to implement these days that I think we have past the point of needing good organization.
> But shouldn’t search be responsible for reducing or at least ranking the results in such a way that no matter how many results you find what you are looking for in the top N?
Maybe if you are Google, having well paid teams and excessive data on what people with your profile are usually searching at the moment. Obsidian is lacking all this, so the search-quality is very depending on the amount of files and results.
Well and unfortunately until recent times ERO was mostly dedicated to criminals first and other folks second but my understand was there was a backlog of criminals to find, capture and remove that person he other parts were less of a concern.
Honestly I am surprised more real estate agents don’t already bake this into the workflow. Thinking about Zillow as well. There should absolutely be a way to identify all the folks during your home search (buying or renting) that are on the registry.
Of course everyone is ultimately responsible for what they purchase but with the commission earned on a few % off a 500k+ transaction I would expect them to do it.
> It’s building materials being in short supply when there’s obviously more houses than buyers.
That I think is a hard one to prove and is where folks are figuring it out. There is obvious continued demand and certainly a portion of it is from other startups spending money. I don’t think it’s obvious though where we are at.
reply