Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | andy99's commentslogin

I’d go as far to say that no good writer uses AI for editing. It’s a tool for people that don’t know how to write, don’t know what good looks like, and are not confident enough to choose raw over soulless.

Canada has a charter of rights and freedoms, but there’s a section that allows governments to override it at will so it’s effectively worthless. And nobody knows that better than Quebec.

In Quebec's version of this law it's legal to insult politicians and police - but only in French.

tabarnak

the sad part is I can't tell if this is true or not

Doesn't Quebec have it's own slightly different constitution than the Canada wide one? If I remember right, there's been cases where things aren't allowed per Canada Charter but are allowed per Quebec's own one.

Sure, Quebec has a different constitution than Canada, but this isn't any different than US states having their own constitutions too.

The difference is that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has a "notwithstanding clause" which, when invoked, allows a province to avoid having one of its laws struck down by federal courts even if it goes against some parts of the Canadian Charter (though only applies to some rights, not all).


Eh, "effectively worthless" is a stretch, you still might have to spend political capital and breed resentment when invoking it, there's a reason the notwithstanding is not invoked every time.

This I believe is part of why forgery is dealt with so harshly, copying a few thousand bucks isn’t a big deal but destroying the integrity of hard currency is.

I always thought the same logic should be applied to corruption by any kind of official. No matter if politician, judge or police officer - their crimes should be punished 10- or even 100-fold because the real damaged is undermining the entire system.

The system being protected in nations today is the pay-for-play,

not “do the right thing for society”.


Agree unfortunately. I hate apple, for the same reasons as everyone else, but I have both a MacBook and iPhone and can’t do much about it. It’s like politics a little, you can only choose the least bad, there is no good.

I have a Linux server, and use cloud Linux machines extensively, but at least the last time I checked, Linux desktop sucks. There are always memory management issues, doing a video call makes my fan sound like a jet taking off, not sleeping, put my laptop in my bag and it gets to hot to touch - that’s just off the top of my head, I’ve tried Linux laptops on multiple occasions and they suck.


Next time you try Linux on the laptop, go with Void.

I don't think "use distribution_name" can be a universal advice, the reality of Linux is that you need to research which particular distribution supports your particular hardware well enough. Or try several distributions until you find one that has the least issues.

That, or make hardware compromises and buy a laptop that provides official Linux support, which is likely to have a more Mac/Windows-like experience of things "just working".


That's horrible advice. Void serves the niche non-systemd userbase. It will always be worse than mainstream distros curated for desktop audience.

It’s often struck me how many “leaders” basically jump to step 6, and come up with an urgent set of superficial actions without even clarifying what they’re trying to do. There’s probably some value in “bias for action” as you might call it. But it’s been one of the difficult adjustments for me, how little people want to think.

Fundamentally they just want the best effort>output ratio. You get information about this during exploration (hence "bias to action"), but you can also get information from taking a moment to step back. It's almost as if there is no catch-all rule for problem solving, which is why these posts have limited utility in isolation (but it's nice to be well-read in the area).

I have, LLMs are less fragile, that’s why I like them. The ability to generalize isn’t just about being general purpose, it’s super robust, and so assuming the budget is there (I agree they are inefficient) end up performing better on many classical tasks that have ood inputs. Before LLMs / foundation models we all struggled with generalization and at least in the work I was doing people were independently converging to using bigger more general models for tasks anyway as compute got cheaper. LLMs are just the most popular version of this.

That's part of the irony here I guess. In specialized fields, think computer vision, there were lots of teams whose innovative state of the art model was essentially just a function of the limitless compute they could throw at the problem. Now there are just people with even bigger sticks.

There are lots of scenarios where specialized models still are the only option for real time, power efficiency, and so on. And transformers and other tech behind LLMs can equally produce better specialized models. But no sympathy for those who confused compute with innovation.


> The ability to generalize isn’t just about being general purpose, it’s super robust

I work with LLMs daily. 5 of my specialized tasks are outperformed by a custom model than a general purpose frontier model. The performance of my custom models not only beat them but are orders of magnitude low in costs and thus are able to be used by more customers.


I suspect you and GP are talking at different layers. I think you are using robust on specific tasks with measurable confusion matrix. I think GP is talking about robust in more complex and diverse workflows, with the ability to self correct over turns.

Either, please correct me if I'm misinterpreting


> If it wasn't a problem, the government wouldn't have to do it.

This is certainly very different from my experience with what governments think they have to do.


Yeah, I don’t understand why people have a problem with this. I think it should basically always be true between peer nations that there is free movement and trade.

Having been through years of brexit crap, I can tell you that the answer is racism, and the weaponisation of outrage by the media

Irony aside (now there's more people from the middle-east migrating to the UK- which if you're racist you tend to hate more than Polish/French/German/Swedes/Estonians)...

I think a lot of people who argued for brexit did so mostly out of ignorance.

"There are regulations on bananas, this makes things inefficient!" (forgetting that the regulations on bananas was about categorising them, not forbidding sale).

They felt out of touch and disconnected from EU parliament, and it seemed complicated and scary. Ironically the reason it's so complicated is because it's a lot more democratic than our own systems- but instead of attempting to understand it they threw their hands up and thought "since I didn't vote for every person who works there, it must be undemocratic!"

It's very true that there was an anti-migration sentiment inside brexit, but I wouldn't go nearly so far as to say that this was the only feeling people had.

I'd say it's mostly feeling a loss of control, which they couldn't place and our politicians were not open enough about explaining that this loss of control of the population was caused by.... the politicians themselves.


> I'd say it's mostly feeling a loss of control, which they couldn't place and our politicians were not open enough about explaining that this loss of control of the population was caused by.... the politicians themselves.

Yeah, the EU is essentially run by the national governments.

However, they typically (and the UK were particularly bad here) use the EU as a scape-goat for unpopular decisions even when they'd agreed to them in Brussels.

Understandable, but bad for Europe/EU in general.


This is what I meant by weaponisation of outrage. The media got people so riled up about things that didn't really affect them so that they eventually felt like the EU didn't represent them.

Fishing being the obvious example. I'd never seen many people care about fishing rights until it was suddenly a hot topic leading up to the vote, but suddenly people really cared about what was happening around the scottish coastline


Japan, Australia, South Korea and few other democracies also should join-in for resilience against US and China

There are a lot of jingoists around who want to use that character trait to amass power/wealth, or to find an excuse for things in their life they don't like. Sometimes, their grievances might even be legitimate.

> Yeah, I don’t understand why people have a problem with this.

Some want to be ensured Canada's sovereignty isn't changed. As this as of right now is a news headline I get their point of view for now.


Are you referring to Trump? He's the kind of person who sees these kinds of things as eroding his power, thus threatening to him.

I just read the first part and if I understand he thinks we shouldn’t be allowed to train LLMs to act like they are conscious because then people will think they are and give them rights? Seems more an education problem than a problem needing rules about what persona you can fine tune in. People who want to will find ridiculous misinterpretations no matter what you do.

Openrouter lets you pick your provider and see their policy re retention and training. You can pick US providers e.g. digitalocean that don’t retain or train on your data. Openrouter is also now owned by stripe, so I don’t see any reason why using them with a trusted provider is riskier than using the big two (especially in light of some of the whole Navier Stokes thing)

If it’s really sensitive then don’t use a cloud provider.


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

Search: