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

Whoa you mean public services are funded by taxes? I knew those free books at the library were too good to be true

No, they're funded by the work of net taxpayers.

And net tax payers are funded by exploiting the labor of lower tax payers

> Like we did with phones that nobody phones with.

Since when? HN is truly a bubble sometimes


Easily less than 10% of my time spent using a phone today involves making phone calls, and I think that's far from an outlier.

You'll cause mild panic in a sizable share of people under 30 if you call them without a warning text.


That’s a pretty far cry from “nobody makes phone calls”. You can also find people who spend 6+ hours on phone calls everyday, including people under 30.

On the flip side, I cause a medium panic in my daughter when I text "please call me when you can" without a why attached. She assumes someone's in the hospital or dying or something.

Yes like those people who send meeting invites with generic or useless title and no agenda or topic text in the invite. I'm not attending.

My mom had to lay down a rule that if I called her at a weird hour I needed to open with whether or not I was okay. Almost 30 now and still do the same thing.

Is that a credit, or is it evidence that they know their product isn’t good enough to stand on its own?

This is nothing surprising and not unique to OpenAI. Marketing is more than half the game for any product.

How many companies are so desperate that they acquire a podcast network? Not even like start a podcast, they decided to add an entire line of business completely outside their core product.

If you’re not capable of setting up DMARC correctly then it’s a safe assumption you aren’t capable of adequately securing your email server. Which is even easier to mess up with much higher consequences. Even if you are not intending to be a spammer, if your server gets pwned you will become an unwitting one.

Why would they? Their ad dollars spend the same, and they have no incentive to police it when they are protected by section 230.

Edit: I’m not implying this is morally right or good for anyone but Google shareholders. This is just 21st Century American capitalism


Have you considered reading TFA? Literally the second paragraph:

> She has a corporate card, a phone number, email, internet access and eyes through security cameras.


That basically means nothing. The article is very light on details.

Go into Claude right now. What does it have? Internet access after you prompt it.

Ok now pull out your phone, a credit card, a security camera. You can say "Claude these are yours, run a business", but nothing's going to happen until you build an actual harness.

Like the idea presented by the article is interesting, but it's basically just a fluff piece. The actual interesting article would have way more detail.


You’re not wrong, but the commenter I responded to clearly hadn’t bothered to read it at all since they were asking questions that are answered in the piece. And when that’s the case it’s hard to believe they would actually be interested in details even if they were available.

Did you read my question though? I read the full article. Please tell me where my question(s) are answered, and I will apologize on this forum.

Obama's drone campaigns, although that's less a war and more just global terrorism.

It’s a federal crime once someone gets convicted for it. Without any precedent it will be up to the first case to lay out how existing law applies to new phenomena that may or may not be covered, depending on what a judge thinks of the arguments.

> Prediction markets can only do sports gambling (the vast majority of their volume) because they self-certify under the CFTC

Sports betting is still illegal in 11 states. They can only do what they’re doing because of legislation and enforcement lag.

> The CFTC doesn't have the same standards of "insider trading" as the stock market, because insider trading is the entire point of business at the CFTC!

True to some extent, but it’s still illegal to use non-public information gained from your firm to trade on personal accounts.


“Retroactive” crime is as you say, ex post facto, and specifically disallowed by the US Constitution.

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

Search: