this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2026
16 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

2646 readers
151 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid - welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned so many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard - both for starting this, and for covering the previous week. We should get a bot to automate this...)

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lagrangeinterpolator@awful.systems 10 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

The OpenAI hacking incident has put everyone on edge. Anthropic, not to be outdone, decides to publicly announce that they have committed not one, not two, but three crimes! Come on! I was told this wasn't a marketing campaign!

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 10 points 2 weeks ago

https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:mm5ebihpjvtrdunomulbls5m/post/3mrx2xflgp22d

ANTHROPIC: Our son loves humanity and for the low price of trillions and trillions of dollars will usher in an era of unprecedented peace and prosperity!
OPENAI: Our horrible oafish son is hacking web sites without our permission.
ANTHROPIC: (eyes narrowing) Our son is also evil

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] gerikson@awful.systems 10 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)
[–] BigMuffN69@awful.systems 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Sir, a 2nd EA adj. SF based hedge fund has managed to lose 40 billion dollars

[–] BigMuffN69@awful.systems 11 points 3 weeks ago

Also apparently young leo is getting married to Dario's Chief of staff this weekend lmaou

[–] scruiser@awful.systems 10 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

The cope on lesswrong is funny. They are in denial that this is a sign of a wider bubble pop and are insisting it is just because he didn't hedge on long enough timelines.

[–] BigMuffN69@awful.systems 11 points 3 weeks ago

"From my perspective as an uninformed spectator, I would expect the bets made by Situational Awareness to be positive EV over the long run."

Actually the value of his calls in the long run is 0, don't worry I'm giving this hot financial tip for free. Do these dorks not understand options work? I guess neither did young leo.

Remember, there's no crying in the casino. *though i have a feeling Leo will continue to fail upward ;_;

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] BigMuffN69@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago

This is my xmas, ty santa

[–] lagrangeinterpolator@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

Before the days of AI 2027, he became famous in 2024 for posting one of the original pieces of writing in the line-go-up genre: Situational Awareness. It seems that like any good grifter, he used this opportunity to start a hedge fund.

[–] EFreethought@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Here is the first sentence: "You can see the future first in San Francisco. "

I feel like I already know everything I need to know about him.

[–] Evinceo@awful.systems 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

You can see the future first in San Francisco

🔮"I see a city street. Massive wealth disparity and a lot of homeless... Jesus that's a lot of homeless"

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BioMan@awful.systems 10 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)

Google shut down the AlphaFold team, trying to reassign the people behind the super interesting problem of using ML to predict protein structure from sequence onto chatbot development. A whole bunch left the company.

https://www.engadget.com/2225849/google-shuts-down-alphafold/

The Business Idiots are truly running the asylum.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] gerikson@awful.systems 10 points 3 weeks ago (8 children)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] lagrangeinterpolator@awful.systems 10 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

There is something about this picture, a warehouse full of books to be destroyed by Anthropic for training data, that just makes me sick. Knowing that they are destroying books in the abstract is bad enough, but seeing the sheer scale of it makes me viscerally angry.

Karen Hao called her book Empire of AI for a very good reason. The empire has all these noble narratives of bringing civilization and progress to the colonies, but in reality the empire only sees resources to be extracted, repackaged, and sold back to their subjects at a fee. Kudos to those who saw this immediately and fought against it. Shame on those who believed in the narrative of progress, to the point where many of them are collaborators with the empire.

Whenever a smarmy fellow on Linkedin posts about how AI is making so much progress in coding or math, I want them to see this picture. I want them to see the videos of families in tears after a data center takes away their home with eminent domain, and other families who have to deal with the resulting pollution. Go beyond the bloodless math of tokens and instead see for yourself what this all truly costs. I hope it was worth it.

[–] YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What kills me is that there are so many obvious ways to be less wasteful about this. Nondestructive book scanners exist. They're expensive but it's not like AI companies are averse to throwing money down a fucking hole. Even if that's not an option, it's possible to rebind the pages and return the books to the market. And regardless of what happens to the physical books, the scans they create could be archived in a format that could be available as a digital library rather than just being fed into the statistical meat grinder to keep the trough topped off with slop. Even if they've got to fight with copyright holders it would cost them basically nothing to leave the option open and given the PR battle they've been losing it feels like doing so would be incredibly obvious. Hell, even Google Books was able to navigate this in a way that was less cartoonishly evil than this because they could point to their digitization effort as a public good in ways that Anthropic here just fucking can't.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gerikson@awful.systems 9 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

a stock-slobber posts a cri de cœur about the coming automation of maths and HN says it's no biggie, think how productive the field will become

https://kirwinhampshire.substack.com/p/the-dark-night-of-mathematics

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49048681

btw the language in the post is bad enough to be entirely human-generated

For me, the affective quality of learning mathematics is empathetically tethered to an act of discovery and creation.

Before you a channel through which humans have accessed the ineffable and sacred for thousands of years is being sealed for eternity.

[–] scruiser@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago

The blogger simultaneously elevates mathematics to some mystical endeavor and fixates on novel theorem proving as the key element of that and believes LLM-based AI will replace human mathematicians at theorem proving in a matter of years... that is quite a combination. I can imagine how 1.5 of those things fit together (although I disagree with that view point obviously), but the whole package is really quite an odd combination.

Also, in the fantasy scenarios where AI really is capable of totally replacing mathematicians, aren't we supposed to get post-scarcity abundance, freeing up your time to pursue mathematics out of pure desire for enlightenment? Maybe the blogger doesn't believe that part? Or they are so attached to themselves personally getting to discover novel theorems first they don't care that the post-scarcity era would on net free up a lot more people to pursue pure mathematics as a hobby.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rook@awful.systems 9 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (4 children)

As an interesting follow-up to the ai-does-maths-using lean4 stubstack comments on Sunday, an llm accidentally uncovers a bug in the lean4 kernel.

Summary by Meven Lennon-Bertrand:

https://lipn.info/@mevenlennonbertrand/116997917683191056

To summarize:

  • an AI agent let loose provides a sorry-free proof of the Collatz conjecture
  • the proof is detected as actually being a kernel bug
  • the bug is related to (nested) inductive types, for which there is no clear theoretical specification: the kernel's code is the reference
  • external checkers (lean4lean and nanoda from a week ago) reproduce the bug, because they essentially copied the reference kernel implementation

Eta: “sorry-free” in this case means a complete proof with no trust-me-bro steps or TODOs… the sorry tactic in lean “proves” a theorem to be correct even if it is garbage or incomplete. More programming languages should make developers apologise for half-arsing their work.

And so

  • AI raises the bar for kernel correctness by a lot
  • without a clear type-theoretic understanding of what is actually implemented, we're toast
  • external checkers help to catch implementation bugs, but without a clear specification they can't catch logic bugs

How bad this is, is unclear just yet… probably not the sky actually falling, but not great. Interesting though.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] aninjury2all@awful.systems 9 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] sailor_sega_saturn@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

It sure is a zany coincidence that all the major American AI companies have come out either for or against open weight AI models with grand ethical and/or patriotic concerns all at the same time isn't it?

Most recently our pal Zuck! https://www.wsj.com/opinion/the-ai-future-is-for-everyone-a0c24e20

I'm just imagining a WSJ reader reading this and thinking "what the heck is this man talking about". At some point you need a little structure or text to balance out the subtext.

Edit: did I miss any?

OpenAI (discussed here the other week): https://nitter.net/deanwball/status/2078133895766114412 / https://xcancel.com/deanwball/status/2078619513575137330

Microsoft: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsibility/topics/open-weight/

Anthropic: https://www.anthropic.com/news/position-open-weights-models

Nvidia: https://images.nvidia.com/pdf/Open-Weights-and-American-AI-Leadership.pdf

Google: https://xcancel.com/sundarpichai/status/2081026488158040181

~~Amazon~~ The Washington Post who I'm sure wrote this for reasons completely unrelated to Mr. Bezos: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/07/02/right-answer-chinas-open-weight-ai-models-is-build-our-own/

That one guy I hate: https://xcancel.com/elonmusk/status/2080672505660834163

[–] mirrorwitch@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

As intelligence becomes abundant, the most important question will be how we direct it. Some argue that superintelligence itself, or a small set of experts who control it, should decide what is best for humanity. I disagree. The history of democracy and economics has shown that there is no single objective answer to how people define the best life, and therefore the best approach is letting people decide what matters to them. Rather than centralizing this power, we believe that delivering personal superintelligence to everyone is the way to answer this question.

Healthy societies also recognize that safety requires checks and balances. If only a handful of institutions have superintelligence, they will inevitably exercise a controlling influence over economics, science and politics. Even with the best intentions, that concentration would limit people’s ability to choose their own future.

Famous enemy of software monopolies and tech oligarchies that have an outsized influence over politics, champion of distributed ownership of the means of computation Mark Zuckerberg

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] lagrangeinterpolator@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (5 children)

Clamuel did another podcast. I don't want to waste my time watching it, but I want to sneer at some choice quotes from news articles breathlessly reporting this stuff as gospel 1, 2

"We are now, like, in the singularity"

Is the singularity in the room with us right now? Even the people on X the Everything (Including CSAM) App aren't so convinced.

Altman said on the podcast that just a decade ago, the so-called singularity still felt like a distant and improbable dream — something he and his colleagues would discuss casually over lunch.

"Now we're actually in the moment that we used to talk about at the lunch table in a very not-serious way," he said. "I've been waiting for this my whole life, and I think it's going to be incredible, hugely positive, awesome for the world."

Do you feel it? Do you feel incredible? Do you feel hugely positive? Do you feel awesome, now that the singularity is here? Oh wait, he's speaking in the future tense again, never mind. Force of habit.

It's also funny how he talks about how positive things are gonna be immediately after the super scary hack done on Hugging Face (really due to incompetence on both sides). Oh no, the AI is gonna kill us all! It's going to be incredible, hugely positive, awesome for the world.

Later in the podcast, Altman criticizes AI leaders who have repeatedly warned that AI is dangerous. He didn't name Anthropic, his primary competition, but its CEO, Dario Amodei, is well-known for making dire predictions about the future in his calls for greater attention to safety.

"I also think some of the alternative visions painted by other companies are quite terrifying," Altman said. "I'm going to make sure that gets pushed against and is not what happens."

At least Clammy realizes that all the doom trolling about how AI will replace and destroy all humans turns out, surprisingly, to lead to overwhelming negative public opinion. But this statement truly reassures me that Scammy has good intentions about AI safety. He will make sure this is pushed against and is not what happens. He wouldn't want another super scary, dangerous hack that just so conveniently turns out to be excellent marketing.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says one of his biggest concerns about AI isn't whether it becomes too powerful in and of itself, but that a single company could control that power.

Yeah, it would be really bad for Anthropic to control all the power of AI. It would be a disaster to hand everything over to Anthropic.

"Every time that humanity has traded off its liberty for safety, it's been a long-term net loss," Altman said. "We are going to put this in the hands of people. We're going to empower them. We are going to let society express its ideas and use this technology in the way they want."

Society is expressing its ideas about AI, all right. But I feel like they aren't what he has in mind.

Altman, meanwhile, said preventing such power from becoming overly concentrated has long been central to his vision for AI, even as his company continues to keep its own models closed.

"For so long now, I have felt focused on this singular goal of abundant intelligence and a belief that incredible human prosperity will come from that, as long as we don't have a weird power concentration and kind of a new authoritarianism," he said.

Well, we seem to have a weird power concentration and "kind of" a new authoritarianism, but I don't see any abundant intelligence or incredible human prosperity.

Lots more sneers on the Better Offline subreddit.

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Do you feel it? Do you feel incredible? Do you feel hugely positive? Do you feel awesome

Yeah, but that's just the cocaine

[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 10 points 3 weeks ago

It was Yudkowsky-2008 who was astonished that "these CEOs and CTOs and hedge-fund traders, these folk of the mid-level power elite, seemed happier and more alive," prompting David Gerard to ask "My dude, have you never heard of cocaine?" I don't know if he had moved to the Bay Area yet but Yudkowsky-2025 had thoughts on LSD.

[–] Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems 9 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

“Every time that humanity has traded off its liberty for safety, it’s been a long-term net loss”

oh has it now. the spirit of humanity’s been in decline since we’ve eroded workers’ freedom to breathe that good asbestos air and lose their hand in the hand mauling machine, yeah?

It gets worse. I found another article about the same podcast: Sam Altman says AI won't shorten the workweek because humans secretly enjoy being busy.

"Technology, for a long time, has been promising people that they're going to work less and they're going to have all this leisure," Altman said. "But somehow we never get the promise of the four-hour workweek at mass scale in society," he added. "And I don't expect AI to change that."

"It's like a relative game. People are very focused on how they're doing relative to other people," the CEO said.

"I think we're all going to be much busier than we thought we were supposed to be in a post-superintelligence world. We're still going to complain about it, but secretly we're going to be happy," Altman concluded.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] gerikson@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

A LWer runs the numbers and doesn't run away screaming like Zitron:

https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/EeTQGxa8RSpwHo4Ez/the-biggest-bet-in-history

Note that this implies massive efficiency gains to the economy. For their one-third slice to equal 8% of those salaries [59% of the total workforce in the USA], the total savings (productivity across that share of the workforce) will need to rise by roughly 24%. So they are absolutely serious about this, and are betting heavily that the productivity boost arrives within four years.

[–] Architeuthis@awful.systems 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Guys guys guys hear me out guys what if I say what if uh the market can't be irrational? Because of all the money? That would be really cool right?

But using like 2000 words.

[–] gerikson@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago

"surely all these very wealthy people and the people they pay to invest for them can't all be under some sort of mass delusion"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] gerikson@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Coindesk: Major bitcoin wallet flaw drains $38 million worth of BTC in 25-minute sweep

A wallet's seed, the secret phrase controlling the funds, is meant to be drawn at random from a pool so vast that guessing is hopeless.

Coldcard's firmware was not doing that. According to a report published by Block's Bitcoin engineering and security teams, a build setting told the device to skip its own hardware randomness generator, and a check in a supporting library tested only whether that setting existed rather than whether it was switched on.

Key generation quietly fell through to a basic software substitute seeded from the chip's serial number and clock registers.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] nfultz@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The AI Race With China Is a Lie Told by Big Tech to Justify the Data Center Invasion via naked capitalism

choice quotes:

More to the point, LLM development in China is incidental to the country’s real goal for AI. Its focus remains on products embedded with AI and robots. Or, as AI policy researcher Liang Zheng says, in China, “The first priority is to use it to benefit ordinary people” (debatable, but indicates the kind of AI they are pursuing).

In the US, the first priority is to exploit people so that the tech oligarchs can profit. It’s chatbots all the way down.


Yet, the “AI race” story is a convenient lie for Big Tech and its political protectors. It is a neat political argument designed to insulate the industry from criticism and regulation.

If every environmental review, every question raised by a community, every issue around water usage and electricity prices can be dismissed or lessened as “helping China,” then meaningful political debate can be silenced. Real regulation—if even possible—can be avoided. Fear becomes a substitute for policy.

At the same time, data center developers and their minions in Washington have tried to weaponize false claims about foreign ties to the anti-data center movement. Kevin O’Leary of Shark Tank fame has explicitly said that our movement is being funded by China. He has no evidence because evidence of a falsehood can’t exist. In fact, Fox News has been forced to retract its coverage of his claims.

We understand why O’Leary and the other Tech Broligarchs don’t understand the grassroots opposition to data centers building across the country. It’s hard to spot the grassroots from the window of a private jet.

[–] schnoopy@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago

I need one of those UFO posters that are like "I want to believe" but it's a picture of the PRCs flag lol.

As always though pointing at the ~~Spanish~~ ~~germans~~ ~~Russians~~ Chinese remains an evergreen excuse as to why you can't be anything other than wholely on board with madness or you're a traitor.

[–] samvines@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago

Missed this paper last week from Google

Funny how now that it's widely known that the general public hate AI, companies producing AI are softening their "it's going to take your job" stance. Surely just a coincidence

[–] samvines@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (3 children)

So it's been 7-8 months since the software industry decided that AI agents are good now and that you can do a year's work in 1 hour

So... Where are all the amazing and wonderful AI generated software products? Where are all the companies using agents to leave the rest of us behind?

All I see are one-shotted maintainers, big marketing stories with little substance and a pile of detritus made up of abandoned vibe coded projects.

It's almost like AI agents make you feel more productive but actually slow you down (paywalled sorry)

[–] gerikson@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah. Behind all the hype about percieved productivity etc., there's really only one benchmark - will GenAI help produce better software, faster, and at less cost? So far this doesn't seem to be happening.

[–] yellowcake@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago

The major shift of not needing SaaS middleman products because AI can spin them up instantly at scale never happened. Instead we see lay-offs to pay for AI tokens while quality plummets and services offered do not increase.

[–] EFreethought@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

The AI shills would say: Are you still using the models from six months ago? Because the new models are sooo much more powerful.

[–] samvines@awful.systems 8 points 3 weeks ago

Funnily enough they said that back then too. What a weird coincidence!

[–] jaschop@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (4 children)

I once listened to a talk by a guy from german OSHA that hit a lot of the good points. Perceived productivity opposed to actual productivity from the METR studies. Mental load of alien code review. (This was a company-internal IT-expert exchange thingy.)

A question in Q&A (submitted anonymously on slido like a sniveling coward) was deadass "Have you ever coded with a frontier model?"

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] saucerwizard@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 7 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Max Kennerly sneers the New York Times:

This opinion piece, written by someone with no relevant expertise, cites two sources, both of them blogs by people who also have no relevant expertise, one of whom is employed by a sham think tank funded by the "Effective Altruism" propaganda network.

Truly embarrassing decision to publish it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›