>Draw a Hacker News-style comment thread. Top comment by a user named "pelican_enjoyer": "Without the pelicans I don't know what to think." Reply from "minimaxir" in a grumpy tone: "Since people keep doing it: no, you don't have to make an allusion to Simon's pelicans every time a Hacker News thread about a new LLM pops up. It's a lower-effort joke than even Reddit memes." Beside the thread, show a pelican riding a bicycle, looking smug.
Since people keep doing it: no, you don't have to make an allusion to Simon's pelicans every time a Hacker News thread about a new LLM pops up. It's a lower-effort joke than even Reddit memes.
I'd just read it as social friction, just like I'd read your comment as that very same thing.
This is the consensus mechanism doing its job, essentially.
__
Though to be fair, the way I frame it assumes no connections between nodes and independent choices, when in reality, we have groups supporting each other.
So it's not necessarily the best mechanism, as social cohesion and other such dysfunctions might be steering away from the objectively correct solution through not necessarily rational biases.
Or rather not necessarily rational when viewed in just the specific context, but possibly rational when zooming out and considering whole-subsystem health.
Like posting the exact same personal brand-building under each new model you mean?
As said, there is no right or wrong here. Well, technically there is and it is my opinion (obviously), but if we take a step back, it's exactly what I just described and you (unfortunately) discarded through bulldozing.
The """"thought leaders"""" will have to live with the fact that some people just don't think that their work is adding all that much value. It's a bit unpleasant for the ego of course, but that's kinda the trade when making money with fluff.
Better luck next time.
-------------
https://postimg.cc/c6L2MjSt
12m 0s and $0.28
>Draw a Hacker News-style comment thread. Top comment by a user named "pelican_enjoyer": "Without the pelicans I don't know what to think." Reply from "minimaxir" in a grumpy tone: "Since people keep doing it: no, you don't have to make an allusion to Simon's pelicans every time a Hacker News thread about a new LLM pops up. It's a lower-effort joke than even Reddit memes." Beside the thread, show a pelican riding a bicycle, looking smug.
This is the consensus mechanism doing its job, essentially.
__
Though to be fair, the way I frame it assumes no connections between nodes and independent choices, when in reality, we have groups supporting each other.
So it's not necessarily the best mechanism, as social cohesion and other such dysfunctions might be steering away from the objectively correct solution through not necessarily rational biases.
Or rather not necessarily rational when viewed in just the specific context, but possibly rational when zooming out and considering whole-subsystem health.
As said, there is no right or wrong here. Well, technically there is and it is my opinion (obviously), but if we take a step back, it's exactly what I just described and you (unfortunately) discarded through bulldozing.
The """"thought leaders"""" will have to live with the fact that some people just don't think that their work is adding all that much value. It's a bit unpleasant for the ego of course, but that's kinda the trade when making money with fluff.
The Assbench: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49807688