The incentive of the human who deployed it—at one remove or another—would require knowing more. But the more likely cases are easy to guess at, e.g., someone is playing with OpenClaw. I'd guess "someone is playing with OpenClaw and intends to write something about it boost their brand, could be a Show HN could be a LinkedIn screed they hope goes viral."

Could be for fun. I remember fun.

Nothing enrages like change.

The key word in the HN headline is _can_.

Humans are not judged on the basis of what they _can_ do.

Reasoning about how to constrain tools on the basis of what they _could_ do, if e.g. used outside their established guardrails, needs to be very nuanced.

Correct; the ability of a model to reproduce source material verbatim does not necessarily make the model's existence illegal. However, using a model to do just that might very well present a legal liability for the user. I would be interested to see the extent to which models can "recite from memory" source code, e.g., from the various MS code leaks. Put another way, if I'm using LLM code generation extensively, do I need to run a filter on its output to ensure that I don't "accidentally" copy large chunks of the Windows codebase?

With Twain in mind, might I suggest we adopt the simple expedient of snake casing such terms.

Finally, someone who actually thought about where to draw the line instead of rejecting words with spaces entirely.

Ximm's Law applies to the "plateau" of 10%

In other words: notionally, if not literally, by the time trailing numbers are collected they are out of date.

This is of course axiomatic, but, that staleness is a serious matter in this particular moment.

It's a cliché that six months can be a lifetime on the bleeding edge of tech.

This is the first time in my career that is more or less literally true.

Humans reason poorly with non-linear change.

This entire article is a demonstration of that.

why have I not seen the butterfly meme yet

"every critique of AI assumes to some degree that contemporary implementations will not, or cannot, be improved upon."

They're token predictors. This is inherently a limited technology, which is optimized for making people feel good about interacting with it.

There may be future AI technologies which are not just token predictors, and will have different capabilities. Or maybe there won't be. But when we talk about AI these days, we're talking about a technology with a skill ceiling.

If you’re making a web app your fancy rust wasm module still has to interface with the dom, so you can’t escape that. Claude might offer you some fake simplicity on that front for awhile, but skeptical that’s it fully scalable

There are plenty of Rust frameworks that handle this interface for you, including calling Rust functions from JS and JS functions from Rust.

You may be on to something there!

Perhaps the solution to breaking the destruction of society via engagementmaxxing may be to make things cringeworthy!

What is your argument for why denecessitating labor is very bad?

This is certainly the assertion of the capitalist class,

whose well documented behavior clearly conveys that this is not because the elimination of labor is not a source of happiness and freedom to pursue indulgences of every kind.

It is not at all clear that universal life-consuming labor is necessary for a society's stability and sustainability.

The assertion IMO is rooted rather in that it is inconveniently bad for the maintenance of the capitalists' control and primacy,

in as much as those who are occupied with labor, and fearful of losing access to it, are controlled and controllable.

I think this goes beyond capitalism.

People willing to do something harder or more risky than others will always have a bigger chance to get a better position. Be that sports, labor or anything in life.

I am 1000% OK with living in a world where basic needs are fully provided for,

and competition and drive are worked out in domains which do not come at the expense of someone else's basic needs.

Scifi has speculated about many potential outlets for "human drive," the frontier/pioneer spirit being a big one; if I could name my one dream for my kids it'd be that they live in an equitable post-scarcity society which has turned its interests to exploring the solar system and beyond.

Sports, "FKT" competitions, and social capital ("influence") are also relatively innocuous ways to absorb the drive for hierarchy and power.

The X factor is, is the will to dominate/control/be subjugated to, suppressible or manageable.

If not we're in for a bad time.