Be precise about the harm done to the community, which I've been part of for longer than it's newer members have been alive. A community in which my accurate forecasting of "risk of ruin" type outcomes has error bars between 60-90%.
Be precise about what a healthy HN means, because that's not written down anywhere, the guidelines such as they are? A masterclass in selective enforcement of blank-check norms for money.
You've got the same dataset I do, and exactly the same access to legitimate authority as opposed to self-arrogated police powers on behalf of public benefit corporations which have neither benefited the public nor a shareholder.
I was here long before you or Dan, and if you ban me, it will be the wedge I need to move this conversation somewhere else.
Let's dance.
edit:
and one more thing, quote a primary source once in a while.
i have better citations ranting than you do larping adult:
If you read this and mount a credible objection that can't be addressed by tweaks to methodology, then I will leave the site forever.
But the asymmetry of the power of selective participation is tyrannical: you engage when you like, your silence is a moral victory by default, and I'm the senior community member by a lot.
Engage constructively, substantial ly, and in public, or deal with my press releases.
The data shows black holes in comments and submissions that correlate with Altman. I ran it on myself to not fix anyone. There are other search parameters that are worse, it's open source, proven in lean4 to a growing degree, and you win by making an argument, not being an unclected apparatchik.
A PhD caliber thesis with devastating epistenics about failures that have claimed conservatively a dozen lives is going gray on an 18 year old account but this shit is fine.
@dang, I'm now threatening to buy a massive oppo campaign with immaculate data and OpenAI's fundraise hanging by a thread.