Because rabbits are cute and fluffy and good and it is the solemn mission of all terrible tech companies to take the things you love and make you associate them with useless AI products.

OK new rule you’re only allowed to call someone dumb for not finding explosives in their pagers if you had, previously to hearing the news, regularly checked with no specialized tools all electronics you buy for bombs hidden inside of the battery compartment.

Yes crypto instances, please all implement this and “disallow” everyone else from interacting with you! I promise we’ll be sad and not secretly happy and that you’ll make lots of money from people wanting to interact with you.

The robots clearly want us dead – “Delivery Robot Knocked Over Pedestrian, Company Offered ‘Promo Codes’ to Apologize” (404 media) (archive)

And here rationalists warned that AI misalignment would be hidden from us until the “diamonoid bacteria”.

Yeah you may have a point, if this came out in like 2010 as like a one-off music video instead of a venture capitalist fever dream everyone would be calling it pretty wild. Any artistic merit came from the training data, prompting, or editing together reams of raw output, rather than the shots themselves; and we all know AI companies like to dress up their demos to make them more impressive on the surface.

I think I’ve just gotten sick and tired of the (lack of) style by this point. It feels like staring into digital noise dressed up in a human skin. Something about the uncanny valley aspects makes it extremely uncomfortable for me to watch; whenever I watch AI videos my brain keeps telling me to run from the demons in the picture and that something is terribly wrong.

It warms the cockles of my heart that all across the web people find AI as annoying as I do.

The youtube thumbnail landing squarely in the middle of the uncanny valley wasn’t a great start. And then I pressed played. Why did I press play?

Billions of dollars for this lol.

If you’re against unrestricted genAI then you’re also transphobic

What. Wait has anyone claimed this? Because that’s absurd.

Man the Pistol unicode mess has always given me mixed feelings

Apple indeed lead the design change, but they did it unilaterally without the input of Unicode. So the standard is still saying that the character represents a pistol, and all the fonts are ignoring that to have it a squirt gun instead, so as to be compatible with a specific Apple font rather than compatible with unicode.

It might have been a mistake for Unicode to introduce Pistol in the first place (I wonder how it was chosen, can’t look that up right now), Pistol apparently came from Softbank, so Unicode was probably including it for compatibility with existing encodings.

IMO it would have been technologically more sound for UI designers to hide it in a UI or font designers to omit it entirely, than to replace it with another graphic with significantly different meaning. Emojipedia demonstrated the potential for confusion with this cheeky text message example.

Of course by this point we’re stuck with water gun so Twitter is just needlessly adding to the mess and Unicode should give up and redefine or add errata to the symbol.

My joke didn’t land apparently but I did not mean to imply they were particularly good at technical explanations. Adjusted the working a smidge.

If HN is best at technical discussion that just means they’re even worse at everything else!

In 2024 it is, at the very least, extremely uncomfortable to read Searle describe Chinese writing as “meaningless scribbles”, “formal symbols”*, “squiggle squiggle”, and “squoggle squoggle”. Basically taking Chinese, ignoring the fact that it’s a real language used by real people and is not alien nor inscrutable nor mathematical, and using it as a prop to purposefully obfuscate a thought experiment.

But that’s like, just my opinion man.

* The paper never seems to get around to calling English letters symbols I wonder why.

Aeronautic Seating Layout Randomization.

Thanks now you’ve sent me down the rabbit hole since I searched for this and clicked on the first ad: coderabbit.ai

One of the code reviews they feature on their homepage involves poor CodeRabbit misspelling a variable name, and then suggesting the exact opposite code of what would be correct for a “null check” (Suggesting if (object.field) return; when it should have suggested if (!object.field) return; or something like that).

You’d think AI companies would have wised up by this point and gone through all their pre-recorded demos with a fine comb so that marks users at least make it past the homepage, but I guess not.

Aside: It’s not really accurate to describe if (object.field) as a null check in JS since other things like empty strings will fail the check, but maybe CodeRabbit is just an adorable baby JS reviewer!

Aside: the example was in a .jsx file. Does that stand for JavaScript XML? because oh lord that sounds cursed

Someone will have the “brilliant” idea to fix this by having chatbots review code in 5… 4… 3…

This person likes the idea of electronic surveillance

It would not be possible for students to be coached specifically for an AI assessment, because the assessment would be happening in the background, over time, without necessarily being obvious to the student.

And by that I mean she really likes the idea of electronic surveillance

Imagine a classroom setting ten years hence where data about each learner’s movements, speech and facial expressions is automatically logged by passive capture devices within the fabric of the classroom. This information is combined with data about each learner’s performance recorded by the school’s assessment system and the teacher, parents and learner themselves. All this data is used to update the class teacher’s pupil records and to provide data for an AI-based teaching assistant that keeps track of every learner’s cognitive, emotional and meta-cognitive progress.

Why? To decide how quickly to ship the struggling students off to the minimum wage jobs, no vetting required!

The AI assistant […] can identify and contact local entrepreneurs who are willing to come and talk to pupils about future work opportunities or how to be an entrepreneur.

Edit: also holy smokes this document is hard to read. It feels like trying to swim through thin air. I didn’t realize it was possible to say so little with so many words, and that’s saying something as I’ve had the misfortune of reading chat-gpt output.

We know $10 USD may not seem like enough to reclaim the internet with the browser we barely maintain and take on irresponsible tech companies that pay us vast sums of money. But the truth is that as you read this email, hundreds of Mozilla supporters worldwide haven’t realized we’re a charity racket dressed up as a browser who will spend all your money on AI and questionable browser plugins. And when each one of us contributes what we can, we can waste the money all the faster!

With the rise of AI (you’re welcome, by the way, for the MDN AI assistant) and continued threats to online privacy like question like integrating a Mr. Robot Ad into firefox without proper code review, the stakes of our movement have never been higher. And marks supporters like you are the reason why Mozilla is in such a strong position to take on these challenges and transform the future of the internet in any way we know how – except by improving our browser of course that would be silly.

(I’m feeling extra cynical today)

Man I can’t even laugh at this one it just makes me feel melancholy.

Google also said something similar in one of their reports. Something along the lines of sure AI wrecked their sustainability report this year, but just you wait until it optimizes the data centers! As if the robots could find holes in thermodynamics or something.

Anyway it’s not that great but here’s my attempt at the sneer you asked for:

“Additionally, we are exploring how attaching flame-throwers to the bottom of private jets and flying over the tree-tops of forests can further increase the accountability and traceability for our Scope 3 carbon emissions.”

Ok this might be a bit petty of me but, yes this HN comment right here officer.

A group pwns an entire TLD with a fair amount of creativity, and this person is like (paraphrasing) “if you think that’s bad news just wait until you hear AIs can find trivial XSS and SQL injections 😱”.

Aside: have I ever mentioned here that you should really stick with .com / .net / .org / certain country domains? Because this sort of stuff is exactly why. Awful.systems can get a pass since the domain name is just that good.