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

I get the joke, but CSUs are fairly inexpensive as far as universities go. Tuition at SJSU is about $9500 per school year for California residents. That's a year of education for almost 1700 students. It may not seem like a much money to some, but it certainly covers a lot.

That directly contradicts these companies' goals of eliminating all employees.

There are tons of reasons AI is actively making the school system worse (amongst many other aspects of society). Immediately jumping to "political coalition thing" seems strange.

I seriously doubt even the government actually knows or has a real plan, let alone one actually related to security. If it's anything like their track record, they'll just be asking the AI about a topic related to their enemies (i.e. anyone opposed to them in any way) to see if it says anything remotely positive about them, or anything remotely critical of the regime or out of line with the regime's "alternative facts".

That and I'm sure these companies could circumvent the mandatory review if they make certain... donations.

Credit cards are lost and stolen all the time, and it isn't really a big deal when it happens, since charges can usually be easily reversed. This does not sound like the same scenario. It also doesn't account for people who lack friends/family nearby or at all.

> it breaks and you were too cool to provision a backup

If we're relying on the average person to back things up properly, this idea is doomed from the start.


> If we're relying on the average person to back things up properly, this idea is doomed from the start.

The average person is relying on the average person, for everything, and I agree, they are doomed from the start.

Tech-related items inclusive.


Yes, you wouldn’t offer your private key to a random food truck.

Just new banks.

Same as people being unafraid of their car key being cloned - because they don’t hand it around the general public.


I still can't comprehend how they managed to blow that much money on what appears to be just a worse version of VR Chat.

Yeah and VRChat must have cost like what? A few million?

One thing that VRChat did lack and horizons had is an in-app builder though. On VRChat you have to use unity which is a big barrier.

But other similar apps do have built in builders too like viverse and spatial have that too and they haven't cost billions either.

I don't know what they've done with all that cash but it feels like they have very little to show for it. Some decent hardware sure but still.


When I worked there a few years back, my eyes rolled hard without VR at $22B of CapEx being spent without clearly-established market demand. They should've spent $1B at least on marketing Workplace and that home assistant box, whatever it was called.

> In short, please stow your rights in the overhead container or in your checked baggage and respect other peoples' right to be left alone.

What does a Bluetooth device's nickname have to do with leaving people alone?


Right, those other people (well, their devices) are asking you (well, your device) what your (device's) name is. You're not telling them until they ask. They need to leave you alone!

Well, that's surely worth sacrificing people's livelihood for.

Yes, same as industrial revolution was worth sacrificing people's livelihood, because in the end we are much better off.

Should I take this as you volunteering your livelihood? Otherwise this comment rings incredibly hollow. It's very easy to say others should sacrifice what they've worked their whole life for, but it's not so easy to give it up yourself. If you truly believe it's worth it, though, you should be eager to do so.

> Should I take this as you volunteering your livelihood? Otherwise this comment rings incredibly hollow. It's very easy to say others should sacrifice what they've worked their whole life for, but it's not so easy to give it up yourself. If you truly believe it's worth it, though, you should be eager to do so.

Well yes, I'm not immune to potential displacement, I don't know where did you get it that I'm somehow in safe spot that will never get replaced with AI. And I'm ok with this risk.


Go ahead and quit your job then, if it's worth it. It's for the greater good, after all, and you're more than ok with it.

People losing jobs is price we pay for progress, not goal in itself. I'm really surprised I have to point it out. Hence me quitting my job will have zero positive impact. Programmers for years have automated other jobs and suddenly when their work is in danger somehow automation becomes bad.

It would speed up the "progress" you so desire. But that's about what I'd expect. Turns out people aren't willing to back up what they promote when it negatively affects them, despite all the talk. Maybe trying to sacrifice the lives of millions of people so you can have a fancier chatbot isn't actually a good idea. Next time you suggest destroying society, try it out on yourself first and see if it's really worth it.

> It would speed up the "progress" you so desire.

Wait, how would it do that? I'm genuinely curious.


I really can't see the Steam Machine being a success at this point, if it ever even releases. It seems like they were really banking on hardware steadily getting cheaper like it pretty much always has in the past. A $1000+ Steam Machine makes the PS5 look like a good deal even after the price increases.

Exactly. Not only have the prices gone up, they've gone up for no real reason other than some CEOs are attempting to take over society. The average person isn't even seeing much of the upside of modern technology anymore, just the downsides. Gadgets no longer get cheaper over time, experiences no longer improve over time, and every new startup or innovation seems to be used to make their lives worse, whether directly or indirectly.

The average person does not really benefit from recent AI tech - and the minuscule benefits they may possibly sometimes get are easily outweighed by the negative effects. Say what you will about the morality of bread and circuses, but making them increasingly out of reach seems like a very bad idea to me.


>The average person does not really benefit from recent AI tech

Really? Most people I know seem to have found the chatbots tremendously helpful. It's much faster than researching via a bunch of google searches.


Most people I know don't use chatbots and don't find them helpful.

And can 'most people' even afford most of these services? Having seen some people's spend, even a $200/month plan has me questioning why I'd spend $200/month on Anthropic products when $200/month would be a substantial chunk of my housing as a blue-collar class IT worker just to survive.

You don't need a $200/mo plan, that's for people chewing through Opus tokens with multiple instances of Claude Code going in parallel. My impression is that most people just use the free ChatGPT tier, or $20/mo at most.

For coding or talking to it? $20 is ok to chat I guess. $100 is minimum if you do this for a job.

You are feeding customer/employer code into systems that the customer/employer has not provisioned for you?

I run my own business, I am the employer.

If you’re writing software professionally, does the “can’t afford to pay for Claude code” they were talking about apply?

I own an apartment, my heating/electricity/water/internet/repairs costs ~400$/month.

My salary hasn't been increased to pay for this extra helpfullness.

Then use the cheap/free plans?

My time is too valuable to waste it trying to convince AI models to actually work.

>It's much faster than researching via a bunch of google searches.

Ah yes that's certainly worth more than a steady job market, low inflation and affordable goods. Get real.


I think I'm already real? The main reasons for inflation, outside of computer components, are related to the fact that we're near the end of a long-term debt cycle. Look at demographics and monetary/fiscal policy. This is just the scapegoat du jour for long-term structural issues.

Stability in the job market seems to mean stagnation in the long term. That's fine in the short run, but eventually, you're Germany/France and major pillars of your economy are cornered and in trouble. Personally, I think the move is total at-will employment paired with UBI rather than the heavy-handed employer regs that those countries have for stability, and I think that's where we're going to have to go if job losses really start materializing.


Google search is worse because of recent AI tech flooding the internet with misinformation and low quality articles.

Low paid humans have been pumping out low quality SEO slop full of misinformation for at least the last 15-20 years, it’s not much different. If anything, the quality is probably somewhat higher.

>The average person does not really benefit from recent AI tech

ChatGPT and Gemini offer enormous consumer value for free.


What value do they get that both couldn't be done before and outweighs the costs?

Personalized learning. Some people on the US were paying over six figures to be educated and now they can do it at a much better quality for free.

You don’t pay for the insight, you pay for the certificate. If the AI doesn’t give you a degree, it doesn’t really help you. Even before AI, you could have learned stuff from a degree for free.

I don't think the software that lies to you and makes things up on a regular basis is a very good teacher. Even if it was, that's not worth the cost to society vs just improving education.

Teachers make even more up than AI in my experience. I would always trust an AI over a human teacher.

That's an incredibly depressing and anti-intellectual way to go through life.

I don't see it as anti-intellectual as in person learning is going to run into physical constraints of bringing together experts of individual subjects to a student. With the power of AI and the internet it is possible to bring such specialized knowledge directly to students where they are at.

Thinking that teachers (or AIs) are always right is the anti-intellectual way to go through life. Between a teacher or an AI just going off of its training data is a close call; between a teacher and an AI doing a web search it's no contest, it's the AI.

College was never about learning it was about signaling. I get two resumes on my desk, one went to Harvard, one learned about stuff on ChatGPT. Which has a higher likelihood of being a success?

It defends how you want to define success, but I would lean towards ChatGPT.

You would lean towards a resume that says "I learned from ChatGPT"? What does that even mean?

You don't have to literally say that. You just work in the skills you have acquired.

You probably meant for "free".

I meant $0.

You meant they use user data to train their models.

Which costs them money to do. Not the users.

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

Search: