Hacker News .hnnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | seer's commentslogin

Exactly - I had switched to a one meal per day setup and have been mostly following it for a few years.

Then after a routine “heart health” check all my indicators were super out of whack - the doctors thought I was on my deathbed - but I am perfectly happy pain free, in shape, physically active person…

Then _i myself_ had to dig into all these tests and figure out that they were measuring the wrong thing - since they try to time where your body is “just about to eat after a fast” - normally for most people in the morning before breakfast, but since my first meal of the day is usually around 20:00 - my body had adopted to have higher levels of various things just to stay on top of my lifestyle choices.

Anyway I had to educate some doctors since they haven’t really had a case like mine, so they weren’t thinking critically of how to interpret the results…

I imagine an automated test _could_ take these things into account with large enough dataset, but it would need to do a lot more reasoning than statistical correlation.

I do believe current sota models should be good enough to come to the correct conclusions with the right harness though.


Reminds me that a few years ago my wifes grandfather (80+) was wondering if he should cut back on the amount of exercise he was doing. He would regularly be knocking on our door at 6am to see if one of us would want to got for a quick 10k run or to hit the gym.

He was a firefighter in NY in his youth and had never stopped exercising even after retirement.

He went to his GP explained his workout routine and was basically told there is no precedent for it as people his age tend to not be running 10km a day. In short he was told if you're not in pain or fatigued keep at it.

I think he's nearly 90 now and has cut back the running to only a day or so a week, but last time we went to visit he was in his garage bench pressing 50kg


Sorry to branch out: How does this one meal per day work for you? There is recommended calories for a person, do you have to follow it somehow to make sure you have enough energy and exercise?

I just eat double portion at dinner, and then nibble on snacks before bed - I haven’t had breakfast in decades, then since I moved to India, with the carby nature of the food it was hard to stay in shape with 2 meals, so I decided to try and skip the lunch too. With fun work it is actually quite easy, and babysitting 4 claudes and helping out colleagues is very entertaining.

Now I either do gym before dinner (heavy exercise) or social dance after.

I’ve been given a lot of advice how I “should” be structuring it - like “don’t eat too much before bed” or “never eat before exercise” … but I haven’t had any issues with what I’m doing so far (~2 years)


One meal ... many snacks?

If the current state is anything to go by, an automated test would not only flag your out of distribution results but try to gaslight everyone reading its output with additional false indicators to map you into an area that's in distribution. Statistical models cannot accept the existence of extremely rare edge cases.

Modern LLMs routinely beat human doctors at diagnosing "extremely rare edge cases".

They have unmatched breadth of knowledge by default, and can maintain attention across entire medical histories.


Citation very much needed.


anecdotes aren't citations.

Maybe something that isn't completely censored anecdata? At best these fall into "well known diseases with obvious symptoms that overworked, incompetent, or simply sexist, human doctors missed" and not actual rare cases.

> Modern LLMs routinely beat human doctors at diagnosing "extremely rare edge cases".

There is a selection bias here. Not saying it wouldn’t work, but right now you hear about exceptional cases, not when the LLM wants to amputate for a wart.

We all work with LLMs, right? It hasn’t been long at all since an LLM gaslit me while attempting to recover an unbootable laptop. I should have been recommended a few simple steps to try; instead, it was unable to ignore the irrelevant details and led me on an hours-long chase. To me that means the LLM will also struggle to ignore irrelevant medical information.


Sad they didn’t finish it. The later books seemed like they were written “to be movies/series” with less political stuff and more visuals / speculative sci-fi. Plus the story has an actual half decent conclusion.

To me the plight of Hollywood is “forever shows” where the writers start without knowing where it would end, so shows never really “end” they just slowly fizzle out without ever getting to the end.

I simply loved “the good place” for having such a powerful conclusion.


I'm currently reading the first book that takes place after the conclusion of the show. There's a large time jump and I suspect they didn't want to age up the actors for 3 seasons.


I really liked reading through the Mars trilogy. It imagined a world where AI is used for fluent effortless translation - local languages get a renaissance since now you _dont_ need a lengua Franca, everyone just speaks what they like the most, and can understand everyone else. Much more “flavour” to human interaction.

Also ai makes things just resource constrained, not labour - whatever you imagined, you could make happen, just needed to “talk to an ai” about it. Lots of terraforming Mars / Venus in that book were imagined like that.

But it also analysed the social / political / behavioural aspects of it. Places that had to preserve old power structures - aka US/Europe/China - got engulfed with mega corps controlling everything etc.

But Mars - where people had enough freedom to imagine something different, came up with political/financial structures to incorporate all of that, and thrived.

I think it tried to play the card of “if US was being created right now - what would its ideals be” If you had a huge tract of land that was “free” and nobody (powerful enough) claiming it, and a population that didn’t yet have strong allegiances and could be persuaded to band together, what would AI, tech and all these years of progress allow us as humans to achieve politically.

Which also makes you feel kinda sad for the US in that world - it is the old rusted power center that can’t innovate and is stuck in the past…

Now it’s only sci fi of course, but it was quite interesting to imagine a world where AI gets smarter and smarter but never reaches that “sentient” threshold. I think the whole trilogy aged incredibly well all things considered.


Sounds like you would enjoy this short story.

Manna - https://marshallbrain.com/manna1


The issues are really social/political/behavioural.

If white collar jobs are decimated the economy will collapse, because it's still - nominally - a consumer economy, even though most of the spending comes from the top 10%.

If 25% of that top 10% is suddenly out of work, that's a huge chunk of GDP gone, and a likely depression as the knock on effects spread.

I don't see anyone thinking about this seriously. [Something something UBI] is not a serious attempt to deal with the problem.

Ultimately you end up with an economy where most humans are surplus to economic requirements and will literally be murdered by economics.

Or wealth and opportunity are widely distributed, but "jobs" are nothing like they are today.

Given where we are now option 1 looks closer.


>I really liked reading through the Mars trilogy. It imagined a world where AI is used for fluent effortless translation - local languages get a renaissance since now you _dont_ need a lengua Franca, everyone just speaks what they like the most, and can understand everyone else. Much more “flavour” to human interaction.

any multilingual person knows that's simply impossible. some things just don't translate, all the subtleties and much of the meaning are lost. even a galaxy-sized superintelligence made of computronium couldn't possibly translate even something as mundane "she sells seashells on the sea shore" into German without either substituting it for another tongue twister or providing a lengthy translator's note.


This article kind of misses the point - of course everyone’s average day is … average. But locals don’t spend all of their days like this, sometimes (once a week/month/year) they would do something fun, or they want to.

You asking them for advice or for them to show you around might push them to do something fun themselves, which they haven’t done in a while. But they have a lot more local context about what _might_ be good to explore or not.

They also know people - they themselves might have average days, but everyone knows that fun person that is the social glue that does all the fun stuff they can direct you - 7 degrees of separation and all that.

And lastly sure - treat the locals ideas with a grain of salt - I never do _exactly_ what the locals tell me, but it is another data point to make your own plans.

When I travel I like to make huge holes in my plans - uncharted time for me to fill in when I’m at location - from local sources or just doing the research then and there. It has always been more natural and interesting to do the sight seeing planing at location, so you can adjust and correct anyway. I guess have adopted the startup mentality of start small and iterate even for my travel experiences :)


But isn’t AI doing the same thing to project management as to coding?

PMs can now cross reference and organize tickets with just a few keystrokes. Organisational knowledge, business knowledge, design systems and patterns, etc all of it is encoded in LLM consumable artefacts. For PMs it is the same switch - instead of having to do it by hand you direct lower level employees to handle the details and inconsistencies and you just do vibe and vision.

When all of the pieces successfully connect and execute reliably, what is left for humans to do? Just direct and consume?

And AI companies with their huge swaths of data are soon gonna be in the situation of being able to do the directing themselves


Such a person is just pushing a giant pile of cleanup work onto their colleagues. Unless they actually checked, the "cross references" are probably wrong in places or just entirely made up. Lower level employees by definition don't have the experience to correct the more subtle inconsistencies, so you've basically just constructed a high pass filter that lets only the worst failures through. Moreover, you're absolutely guaranteed to lose the respect of those lower level employees--forcing someone else to clean up your sloppy work is just cruel, and people resent being treated cruelly.


I’ve noticed that agents almost always fail at the planing vs execution stage.

I follow the plan -> red/green/refactor approach and it is surprisingly good, and the plans it produces all look super well reasoned and grounded, because the agent will slurp all the docs and forums with discussions and the like.

Trouble is once it starts working there would inevitably be a point where the docs and the implementation actually differ - either some combination of tools that have not been used in that way, some outdated docs, or just plain old bugs.

But if the goals of the project/feature are stated clearly enough it is quite capable of iterating itself out of an architectural dead end, that is if it can run and test itself locally.

It goes as deep as inspecting the code of dependencies and libraries and suggesting upstream fixes etc. all things that I would personally do in a deep debugging session.

And I’m supper happy with that approach as I’m more directing and supervising rather than doing the drudgery of it.

Trouble is a lot of my team mates _dont_ actually go this deep when addressing architectural problems, their usual mode of operandi is “escalate to the architect”.

This will not end up good for them in the long run I feel, but not sure what they can do themselves - the window of being able to run and understand everything seems to be rapidly closing.

Maybe that’s not super bad - I don’t exactly what the compiler is doing to translate things to machine code, and I definitely don’t get how the assembly itself is executed to produce the results I want at scale - that is level of magic and wizardry I can only admire (look ahead branching strategies and caching on modern cpus is super impressive - like how is all of this even producing correct responses reliable at such a a scale …)

Anyway - maybe all of this is ok - we will build new tools and frameworks to deal with all of this, human ingenuity and desire for improvement, measured in likes, references or money will still be there.


Yes, but the YouTube ed channels are such a treasure in and of itself. We had the “tech” to produce content like this for almost a century, but it took the Internet and democratization of content creation to come up with gems like smarter every day, veritasium, extra history, etc

My fear is that this is also being reshaped with ai, mostly for good now but I feel like the personal touch and passion of these creators is being diluted with the advent of generated content.

Maybe we are in a valley of the uncanny valley and the ai tools will become so good that they can successfully translate someone’s passionate vision faithfully, then it could be another renaissance.


In among all the MrBeasts and JackSepticEyes on Youtube there are some incredibly creative people.

Two that my 5-year-old loves are OddAnimalSpecimens who could easily have been on BBC children's programming in the 1980s, and Terragreen who would have been his ITV counterpart :-)

Probably the most entertaining child-friendly programme you can watch right now is whatever Jake Carlini is doing. Some wee guy in a house in Austin, Texas is coming up with better stories, better production values, and better life values than any of the "proper" children's TV productions, except maybe Sesame Street.


Thanks for the recommendations - I’m also big fan of 3blue1brown and PBS science, but as a recent dad am on lookout for content for my son to watch when he comes of that age - he’s just 1month now, hopefully by that time AI has not enshittyfied everything


We're a multilingual household, so another that gets a lot of love is Sendung mit der Maus which was originally a TV series but now is on Youtube as well - including some very old episodes. My son's German is way better than mine though, and these days so is his Gaelic - mostly I deal with people in English and I've kind of started to lose that skill.

If you like big 4x4s (and who doesn't?) then Matt's Off Road Recovery is pretty good. Utah looks lovely, and of course they're culturally fairly free of rude words so that's pretty okay for children.

Quiet Nerd is another of my son's favourites, he builds little electric-powered campers and drives them out into the woods near where he lives.


The youtube channels are nowhere near the style and depth of documentaries like the ones above...


Check out Technology Connections. This is way, way, way more in depth than anything one can find on TV.


Thinking about it I have to revise my statement somewhat. I have seen The Great War, Technology Connections etc and my Youtube algo is after 15 years very tuned to me.

The issue is somewhat that this stuff needs to be pushed more into peoples feeds and not pregnant spiderman videos.


If anybody wants some more encouragement to check out Technology Connections ... the vibe is hour+ long Andy Rooney pieces.


Damning with faint praise. He was never a first-rate reporter, AFAIK. More like Paul Harvey.


> The youtube channels are nowhere near the style and depth of documentaries like the ones above...

My friend, if you enjoy long format, deep diving documentaries written, produced and narrated without AI about Space, Physics, Human evolution or planet Earths history, then I insist you head over to the History of the Universe YouTube channel and start watching!

This specific video is probably my favorite (I'm a sucker for contemplating "time"and what it actually is) and was the one that got me hooked on their channel. They go way deeper into the details without becoming a formal lecture and it's genuinely captivating. https://youtu.be/ZSmNii0uOmw?si=3Jaty3XcMGlryhh2

https://youtube.com/@historyoftheuniverse https://youtube.com/@historyofhumankind https://youtube.com/@historyoftheearth


Close to style, naturally styles are different

Lack of depth? Wrong. Just go beyond the usual pop-sci stuff on YT.

You can go as deep as you want. Surely it won't be "as fun" or "tiktok sized" but if you want depth it's there


That is fair, I have checked out some The Great War videos. Not to mention podcast stuff like Hardcore History. They are very good an in depth.

There is also full MIT/Harvard courses on Youtube.

So yes it is all about what one looks up.


Depends on what you follow. For example, look up The Great War.

At least where I live, basically everything that's on discovery, national geographic and the history channel now is just "experts" talking (reading a script) about "hitler's secret sex life" or some such thing, interspersed with a re-enactment shot or one of the "experts" walking around a slightly relevant building.


That is fair, I have checked out some The Great War videos. Not to mention podcast stuff like Hardcore History. They are very good an in depth. There is also full MIT/Harvard courses on Youtube. So yes it is all about what one looks up.


Any particular recommendations? I’ve been meaning to queue some up to have in the background playing when the kids are around hoping to stumble across something that that might pique their interests


Throwing out my recommendation for History of the Universe as well as its sibling channels. Honestly, the people behind these channels produce higher quality documentaries, both in substance and style, than 99% of the "professionally" created stuff I've watched in at least three last 5 years.

https://youtube.com/@historyoftheuniverse https://youtube.com/@historyofhumankind https://youtube.com/@historyoftheearth


Not GP but here are mine, perhaps not all work for the kids and might require some attention but:

AlphaPhoenix - https://www.youtube.com/@AlphaPhoenixChannel - Probably needs no introduction to HN, but some great educational physics videos.

Huygens Optics - https://www.youtube.com/@HuygensOptics - Retired optics guy, lots of interesting stuff on making lenses and other optics phenomena and physics.

Dr. Jorge S. Diaz - https://www.youtube.com/@jkzero - Really good videos on the early history of quantum mechanics and related physics around that time.

Idealized Science Institute - https://www.youtube.com/@idealizedscience -Educational non-profit aimed at helping teachers and students, mostly physics. Typically featuring great physical demonstrations.

Tasting History - https://www.youtube.com/@TastingHistory - Recreates historical dishes, as well as serving interesting history about or surrounding the dishes.

Brian Lohnes - https://www.youtube.com/@brianlohnes3079 - Weird and fascinating history tidbits from mostly motorsports like drag racing.

Marshall Bruner - https://www.youtube.com/@MarshallBrunerRF - Accessible videos explaining radar and RF concepts.

ProjectsInFlight - https://www.youtube.com/@projectsinflight - Has a few amazing videos explaining how semiconductors work, also how to make them at home.

Modern History TV - https://www.youtube.com/@ModernKnight - Lots of interesting videos about the middle ages in Europe, how people lived their lives as peasants or knights etc.

Extractions&Ire - https://www.youtube.com/@ExtractionsAndIre - Fun guy from down under making compounds for his main channel Explosions&Fire in his shed.


What the author is missing is that in his decision to limit the use of LLMs in his work, he omits the part where he “can”. E.g. he is resourceful and accomplished enough to be able to do the work he desires with no LLMs - but most people actually can’t. There are whole swaths of people software engineers that don’t write tests because “it slows them down” but they have never learned how to write testable code. And when thrust into an environment where they need to learn quickly - they don’t really have a way not to use ai, if they don’t someone else will, and take all the credit.

Learning how software is built is hard and gruelling work, and you need to constantly invest in yourself. Trouble is there is no time left to “go back to basics and learn FP” for example, because you also need to keep up with all the new LLM stuff happening on top of that.

It is easy for us who already have the foundational knowledge to be able to step back, take the wheel and try to do it ourselves, but plenty of people simply don’t have that option.

And I expect this trend to deepen and broaden. There will definitely be a lot more “witches” than actual engineers.


People learn what they need to learn to be successful (if they want to be successful). The newer generation of coders will learn exactly what it takes to be better than their peers, and that will still include building rock solid, highly performant software to beat the competitors, or they'll lose their jobs and someone better will do it.

If they do it entirely using AI to code, and the end output is good enough, they'll learn all the right skills to do this.

Human's always think everything is sliding into doom, and inevitably, it doesn't.


Exactly this. People are so "doom and gloom" about the future with AI, but I think it's because they are subconsciously worried they can't keep up. I am not immune to it. I feel that dread every once in a while too.

But at the end of the day, does it really matter to most people how a car works? No. When it breaks, we still have professionals to fix it.

The same can be said about software. Does it actually matter how it gets built or what the code looks like, so long as it works and there are no security vulnerabilities? Not really. We will always need people who know how to debug/fix it, albeit that number might be smaller than it is today.


I think the right term for highways or most other car roads is “car sewer” - you need very specialised equipment to navigate them, they are deadly, smelly, loud and unpleasant. One of the worst environments humanity has produced.

Yes they ship people around somewhat fast. Slower than possible with other methods, and the cost is incredible - economic (much more expensive per passenger than almost any alternative), political (they inherently divide people, dehumanise and make people never really share a public space), health - they reduce lifespan by both lowering living quality as well as directly killing a staggering amount of humans per year).

And we have learned how to build better places for humans that do not need these coffins on wheels - if you visit any European capital, and most Asian ones - you will see environments built for humans, not cars - soo much nicer.

So cars as a technology have definitely not been beneficial to humanity overall, but it has been somewhat useful to some.

I think strongtowns were very good advocates of what places in America could like if you look beyond cars. I personally like the “not just bikes” channel though.


I had fun “hacking” my router that turned out to be just unzipping the file with slight binary modifications, it was so simple in fact I just implemented it in a few lines of js, even works in the browser :-D

https://ivank.github.io/ddecryptor/


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: