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

Such sleeper accounts, slowly acquiring clout and time on the platform are often used by botnets. One day they (or their actions) will be sold to the highest bidder to upvote a comment, support an idea, ideology, politician or party or some virtual product, stock or coin.

Possible and that is definitely a thing, but I personally I would not rule out, that there still can be a human behind it, just with that specific style and careful about his privacy.

I've been planning vacations with ChatGPT's Deep Research since it became available. Absolutely brilliant!

From finding areas with favorite activities for each parents, teens and kids to discovering the do-not-miss attractions and scheduling our vacation between them - it is invaluable. I've seen places I never knew existed in countries I've never been to before and speaking languages I did not speak.

Very few mistakes and lots more flexibility and understanding than the travel agents I used before. I do write long prompts though with lots and lots of info about our family and what we like to do.

Not yet good at finding, filtering by our criteria, comparing and booking available accommodation yet, but it's getting there.


Your clients and your competitors' clients did benefit from this overall faster coding output though.

Eventually your employer benefitted too, from more & happier paying customers.

Finally you indirectly befitted as well - through continued employment, salary and bonuses and stock (if you own any).


But that didn't happen in reality, did it?

Clients - I don't see anyone delighted that apps are better, or cheaper, or more secure. If anything, I see more enshittification, more half-baked ideas and more fear that security is worse now that we let AIs write almost all code.

Employers - They didn't really sell more or expanded their customer base. They would have, if they had the exclusive advantage, but now everyone has AI. They can cram more features in their software quicker, but so can their competitors, and AI is not magically opening any untapped market. If anything, everyone is now doing the same thing - trying to get their software on the AI train, with mediocre results so far.

You - did you benefit really? The job market is shit due to the death of ZIRP, the nature of the job itself is changing and there's a lot of uncertainty around. If anything, employees are now laid off more, not less, and salary and bonuses are not increased in any measurable way.

It looks like to me that we have to dance this particular dance because if we don't do we're left behind. That's fine, it happens every now and then. It might even be that in the future we will have tangible advantages from LLMs - better automated health care, better learning opportunities come to mind. That has to be demonstrated. But now, in year 2026, what's one advantage of AI? Having less and pricier RAM? Being able (and expected) to write more code in less time?


There are other reasons though. Whole house backup is a game changer. Battery always holding about twice our daily usage (or thrice a reduced, emergency usage) means I don’t really care about blackouts or midnight electrical company maintenance power cuts.

Direct to EV DC charging means I don’t buy gas, either. Planning for induction range and heat pump someday too. Not paying for energy about 3/4 of the year feels awesome.

Panels are cheap. Cheap to replace too. The newer ones have even better efficiency. My whole (unsubsidized) sistem cost around $15k here in Eastern Europe and amortization was never a consideration. Money well spent.

Finally, giving the finger to another crappy government-granted monopoly and proving once again that there is no such thing as a “natural” monopoly: priceless.


Software running modern farming runs in datacenters. For example, AI checking images from drones monitoring health of crops, then directing drones with treatment.

Software ate the world, now the world eats software.


Nah. Not buying it. Nobody needs ai checking or drone-based pesticide dispersal. Sure maybe those tech are used here and there, but not widespread enough to say that I am eating stuff that only exists because of datacenters that haven’t been built yet. In top of that you can run all the image processing you need on a $500 consumer GPU, and afaik crop dusting drones are human operated for the most part


State run (or heavily regulated) services around here in Eastern Europe: health care, education and housing. All incredibly bad and expensive, I pay huge chunks of my monthly salary for them and I try to avoid them at all costs. They get worse and more expensive with time too.

All the other services and products I use in my life, from the car I drive to the clothes on my back, the food I eat and the device I write this on are provided by private enterprise and they have become much better and cheaper in my life time.


Health care, education and housing have been getting worse and more expensive in the US over the decade also. Must be all that nationalization.


I can buy "more expensive", but as far as "worse", can you provide the relevant metrics?

I don't think that your chance of survival of a heart attack or lymphoma got worse since 2016.


If you can afford less (lesser treatment, drugs, procedures, quality of doctors and hospitals you can pay for), then your chances of survival also got WAY worse.

Doesn't matter if the 1% has now access to better versions.


Sure, if actual availability of healthcare to an average American has grown worse, that would be a bad result. But that is something you should demonstrate with data instead of just asserting it.


I mean one can go look at the health outcomes of the average american vs other developed nations, and see that we do not get much for the amount of money we spend. I won't bother to argue this with you. If you're genuinely operating in good faith, you're just as capable of finding the studies as I am, and if not, there's really no point


When comparing average Americans and their health to average, say, Spaniards, we should not ignore the 400 lb gorilla in the room named "obesity".

Even Europeans are getting bigger, but America is way, way worse. Seeing those extreme landwhale-type people who cannot even walk around the mall and navigate it using a motorized cart, throwing bulk packages of horrible shitty ultraprocessed food and drinks into said cart, always makes me wonder how the hell is your healthcare system even capable of keeping them alive.

That is nothing short of a miracle, and should be taken into account in all international comparisons.


Uhuh, That's why we're #1 in the world in conditions uncorrelated with obesity like infant mortality right?


Does this concern an average American, or mostly the poorest quintile of the population?

We're not discussing whether your healthcare system is friendly to the poor; everyone knows that the US is not particularly kind to its poor, in any aspect.

The original topic was if its overall quality declined in the last decade for the average American, who is not poor.


If it's bad enough 'for the poor' that it's pulling down the average for everyone that's a pretty damning indictment of the system overall is it not?

I'll be honest. I really tire of the mental gymnastics people put themselves through to make excuses for the American system. I don't think we have anything more to discuss here.


I don't have concrete metrics/sources to give right now, but my general perception from reading the news is that there's been staffing issues pushing healthcare systems in the US towards increasing workloads in individual providers, leading to less time/attention given to individual patients, lower availability of appointment slots, and offloading of patients onto alternative app-based telehealth platforms, which have been trending up alongside aquisition/consolidation of independent private practices.


Staffing problems are absolutely everywhere, regardless of the particular healthcare system or even political system. Czechia, the UK, China, Japan. It seems to be a global trend, much like falling birthrates.


I mean, yeah, that was the point of my original reply: health care, education and housing have been getting less accessible in general, not just that poster's country. (Or wherever they're from. I checked the comment history and it seems to be 90% talking back to people criticizing capitalism/markets. Wouldn't be my preferred hobby of choice, personally.)


Not a hobby, but a duty. I lived under both systems and I do not wish the horrors I’ve seen in my youth onto my children. Although at this point, it’s probably unavoidable. It seems that some lessons can only be learned by experiencing them, no warning is ever enough: Russia, communism.


Yes, now ask someone from a nordic country about how best to balance capitalism with regulation and social safety nets. I think you'd get a very different answer.


Step 1: start with a vast reservoir of oil revenue and a culturally-homogeneous population


You mean the country that immediately asked for help from a country with vast oil reserves and a famously heterogeneous population (Iraq)?


I must have missed the fact that sweden, denmark, and finland had vast oil reserves. Also Sweden's population is now ~ 20% immigrants.


> Must be all that nationalization.

No, it’s the regulations. In less regulated, freer markets like vision correction eye surgery the costs went down and quality up. Even in health care.


You mean in places where every random without a degree can perform eye surgery, and doesn't matter if one in 5 customers go blind from it? Yes, that sure drops the prices.

But they're way cheaper than the US in heavily and properly regulated health markets too.


You'll forgive me if perhaps I want something as important as eye surgery to be well regulated. Have a look at health outcomes for literally any industry where regulation is lax, like Brazilian plastic surgery. It's not great.


Sure, I totally get you. Then higher costs, lower availability and crappier services (all due to less competition and more bureaucratic hoops) is a price you should be happily willing to pay.


Contrasting the American Healthcare system vs one of pretty much any other developed economy proves this to be false.


State-run all those things used to be way cheaper and better here than after privatization. So much more, it's not even funny.


Capitalism is the only known system that aligns natural, normal individual greed with the benefit and advancement of the society.


> help humans instead of replacing us or squeezing us as hard as possible in the name of productivity

Increasing their productivity is helping humans.


These days it’s forbidden to deny the horrors of nazism but quite fashionable to glorify the murders and confiscations of communism and to even justify Marxist murderers like Mangione.


PCs are also made by corporations, together with PC parts. The reason computing became so cheap during the last 50 years was competition between said corporations. Competition that is also pushing the AI token price down and also encouraging - corporations - to come up with models that can run on user hardware.

So what are you ranting against?!

> Own nothing and be happy.

Ah, here it is. Only governments can confiscate our property and force us into that. Governments and politicians that keep telling us how evil corporations are…


In the digital age corporations can and do confiscate things we thought we owned. Amazon removing paid-for kindle books, devices getting bricked, paying a recurring fee to use some features in your car.


Every year, the government comes around, reassesses my house value (always up, never down) and ask me to pay a percentage (always increasing) or they will take away my house which shelters my kids and family.

So, no, I am not too worried about Amazon removing my $9.99 book.


The “own nothing and be happy” quote is from a blog post made by the World Economic Forum. I find meta-governmental organisations even more troublesome, and you can’t vote them out.

It isn’t only conspiracy theorists who should be disturbed by whatever politico-corporate freemasonry that goes on in Davos.


> Only governments can confiscate our property and force us into that.

... Do you want corporations to have that power too or something? What are you saying here?


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

Search: