I'm pretty much hardline anti-AI and even I would say this is too far. If I read documentation or ask my wife to review something, those people did not write the final product. Perhaps it would be mentioned in a citation, like this person has.
I think most people know this and are fine with it. YC owns the site and advertises their stuff on it sometimes. The site itself is not trying to milk you for every penny or trying to exploit you.
Naw, limiting LLMs for an event that's specifically about learning, growing, and collaborating makes a lot of sense. If it ends up dying it won't be because of their stance on LLMs for a conference.
AI can find useful exploits but the highly publicized ones are among a sea of false positives and the successes I've read were found by people who were already experts. I can 100% see a public bug bounty program being inundated with garbage even if there are diamonds in the rough.
Is this a troll comment? I don't see where the author used AI to generate the code and if you don't see the point of experimenting with technology, you're on the wrong website.
Too late for me. I was on Spotify since 2013 and switched to Qobuz due to AI, bad recs, and dislike for the company. Qobuz puts much more effort into manual curation so I still find awesome weird music and have encountered 0 AI. Mainly due to not relying on recommendation algos anymore. I'm sure there is still AI in there. Only issue I've encountered is an annoying playback bug when switching from wifi to data.
You would also have a whole team of consultants, advisors, lawyers, and VP+ people specializing in each area telling you what the problems and possibilities are if you actually had that job. They're not operating in a vaccuum.
Of course they would. A criminal is just a person. And with such an extraordinary percentage of the US population in prison, you can expect the full spectrum of ability, intelligence, passion, compassion, and everything else. Our prison system is an extreme tragedy that most people are numb to because it's been that way forever.
I think this is true for many. Hence paid services that will keep track of subscriptions for you. I saw somewhere a proposal to force subscription services to refund you if you didn't interact with it at all during the payment period. That seems reasonable. If it's only profitable through people's inattention, it's a leech and shouldn't exist.
I agree. When my mother died I got access to her emails, diaries etc. I read some and as you would expect there are a whole range of emotions and opinions in there, many of which I did not care to engage with. So I asked my wife to read some and she said said she thought it was worth keeping so we do. I will not read it, but perhaps someone else will get some value from it someday. It's no effort to keep (no boxes or terabytes of data).
It's a funny way of imposing a very large fine. Make the service only available during predefined "visitation hours", prevent updated learning except from resources available in the prison, restrict speech and actions according to prison rules etc.
Maybe for literate programming, we can switch from common, ambiguous human languages like English and Spanish to [Lojban](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lojban)! That way our human language will be unambiguous which will translate to machine code much better. We'll call this the de facto "language for programming". Improvements and other variants may pop up in the future as new needs arise. All that is old is new again.