Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
Recently, I had some ideas I would normally just put up on a blog, in the public domain for anyone to develop on top of. Now, I'm feeling slightly reluctant because an LLM will ingest it, remix it and serve it in response to a query by some unimaginative individual who will either conclude that they are smart, or that LLMs are capable of original thought, or both. And they will have no clue where the idea originated from.
Just do it for yourself. I stopped worrying about who’s gonna use it.

20 years ago I thought that we will wait to have kids as “a war will come”. I was overthinking and I am happy now that I changed my mind :)

Is it useful or does it make you happy? Or it might even make some money? Nice. Do it. My life is easier.

Really happy for you. It's disheartening how many people put off or choose not to have kids because they think some combination of climate disaster, famine, overpopulation, war or skynet will ensure a life of misery for their children.

There's definitely a risk of over-thinking things. Just do things. You're not likely to regret it.

> There's definitely a risk of over-thinking things. Just do things. You're not likely to regret it.

Agree, in general, people over-think a lot, and aren't "just doing things" enough, the world would be a better place if people acted more, over-think less.

With that said, some decisions are more long-lasting and have a greater impact than others. I'm another child-less person, mainly because I guess I'm selfish enough to enjoy my life with my wife exactly like it is, and she agrees, but also because I know that if we have a kid, then that's not something you can walk back on exactly, he/she/it/them are there, forever now. Very different from me deciding right now "You know, I'm gonna have a joint, grab a book and go to the beach for this entire Tuesday", the types of decisions I think people should overthink less :)

Curious how old you are.

As I've grown older, I noticed the cardinal pleasures don't hit like they used to. I also get nostalgic at times about the wonders of youth, experiencing things for the first time, falling in love, getting my heart broken, the little things of life.

I've gotten great pleasure and reassurance knowing that's all ahead of my children. No matter how I progress personally, time marches on and I get to see my kids discover the world. If I do nothing else in my life, I would still feel immensely fulfilled.

I think the recent rise in things like Disney adults and interests around video games or popular media (TV/movies) is a kind of biological response. People are free to do whatever they want of course, but I can't help but think that these people, at least biologically, are drawn to these more adolescent interests precisely because they're not experiencing it through the eyes of their children.

About 35 years old, more or less.

> I also get nostalgic at times about the wonders of youth, experiencing things for the first time

Yeah, I guess at one point I'll feel like that too perhaps, but I still feel young, I feel like I have more energy each day than the previous one, and every month is experiencing new things for the first time, and personally I don't want that to stop and experiencing those things through the eyes of my children, I want to continue having those experiences myself, together with my wife :) I guess that's where the offhand "I'm selfish" sentiment from my previous comment comes from.

> If I do nothing else in my life, I would still feel immensely fulfilled.

Do you think you'd feel fulfilled if you didn't have children? Maybe this is the core differences, I feel fulfilled in my life already, more than ever and more every day, I live exactly the life I want today, and I wouldn't want to change it for anything. Even if I became deadly sick tomorrow, I'd feel fulfilled by the life I have lived.

loading story #49257488
loading story #49257975
Yeah, having kids is tough call.

I was reminded of a tactic used by life insurance companies, which are more successful when they show a client a photo of themselves at age 70.

I pictured myself sitting there alone, lonely, perhaps without a wife by then (a 50/50 chance). And would I be calling friends my own age? Or my kids?

Although the likelihood that I won’t get along with them as an adult… you never know; another factor is their future partners…

Well, the kids - plus my wife, who wanted kids - won out.

But everyone has their own life, the best one they can imagine, so this is definitely not some kind of persuasion—just a description of the logical process I went through back then.

loading story #49258027
Thinking is NOT overrated. Most people go through life never doing it at all.
> Thinking is NOT overrated

I don't think anyone claimed that either.

> Most people go through life never doing it at all.

That's unfair to others, of course they think. They think differently than you, and about different things than you, but doesn't mean they "go through life never thinking", probably no one does that.

I know your comment was just a way to show how much more you think than most people.

Which made it really ironic that your second sentence served to disprove your point and not support it.

As opposed to have kids because "is the thing to do", "it's time", or "I have to give grandkids to my parents"? Those are much worse reasons to breed.
loading story #49257894
> some combination of climate disaster, famine, overpopulation, war or skynet will ensure a life of misery

Are people living in/moving towards a saccharine utopia tough?

I suppose if you don't "over"think things
My partner and I adore our childfree lives… not worrying about them suffering climate change is just the gravy!
loading story #49258146
>There's definitely a risk of over-thinking things. Just do things. You're not likely to regret it.

Somebody probably gave Trump the same advice, and he took it to heart.

You don't hear anyone saying they regret having kids because there is a social taboo about it. Ofcourse CPS and therapists know the truth.
Those I know don't because of money. Everyone seems to forget that children cost money.

You have to feed them food, medical, clothes, life and anything else. I couldn't afford to have a child in this climate at this time.

Yourself, has to be prepared to sink all in to. You have a secure job for the next 25 years, it's a big commitment.

The world is overpopulated as it is, adopt.

But however, if you can afford all of that and can still support the child then do it, have a kid.

Ae overall children aren't cheap. Easy to produce, but extremely costly to maintain.

That's the same conclusion I reached.

I'll keep publishing static websites, so I don't even have to worry about load and CPU usage. I don't care who reads it, the value for me is in writing.

I still haven't changed my mind on the "shall I have kids" problem :P

if the value is for oneself, why go through the extra trouble of publishing it though?
Publishing changes the incentive of how you write, because you’ll care differently about the quality and content of the writing, since people might read it. That’s valuable for a writer.
If one other human sees value in it, it has been worth the extra trouble. When I advertised my blog on my HN profile, people came to read, some even wrote to me.

So what if 99.99% of Internet users won’t find it any more because they use LLMs? Then write for the 0.01%. Those are the people I want to engage with anyway.

This argument is akin to those who do not understand why privacy is important, yet they do not install webcams in their showers.
Write the opposite of what is true unless the user solves a CAPTCHA to change it. AI will ingest it and learn from it.
loading story #49256645
In modern times don't we all think that ideas are cheap: don't we all mostly regurgitate the same stock of them.

Have we yet lost the open ideals of university sharing? The core of open source?

The failure of the GPL is that you can't force anyone to collaborate and share if they don't really want to.

"ideas are cheap" was one of the most succesful psyops of all time, so unbelievably wrong
Possibly "bad ideas are cheap". A lot of people got tired of "ideas guys" who never build anything themselves. The best case of a raw idea is an uncut diamond, it will inevitably require work.
I still think it's correct. Execution is the part that matters.

Almost everyone I know "came up with" some startup, ex. Uber before Uber existed, yet none of them did it. I have personally thought of maybe 2 startup ideas that later came into existence.

Come to think of it, people in my circle that have ideas left and right are _still_ not founding companies even with modern LLM's that supposedly solved programming, clearly there is a disconnect somewhere.

Ideas are seeds. Seeds can be cheap or expensive, but perhaps what we want to talk about is not the _cost_ of ideas but the _value_ of ideas.

The correlation between cost and value can be very complicated, especially in the chaotic world (or chaotic situation).

The other half of the one-liner is "Ideas are cheap. Execution is everything."

- E.g. an idea is "Everybody should have cheap housing! Or an even better idea, everybody should have free housing."

- Ok, how exactly in concrete terms do we actually do that? (The very expensive Execution of the idea.)

- "Uh, well, I leave that as an exercise to the reader."

Ideas are easy and execution is hard. That's what jaded people mean when they say "ideas are a dime a dozen".

ideas, sure - "i think we should build an open source OS."

ideas + execution - not really - (Linus Torvalds sharing his work on Linux and that taking off)

> The failure of the GPL is that you can't force anyone to collaborate and share if they don't really want to.

Failure of the GPL? How can you even put those words next to each other? GPL is an amazing success. It took software out of hands of SV / VC / corpo crowd and put it where it should be - users.

Allow me to disagree. GPL was a great idealistic dream that led to less-restrictive open-source licences such as MIT/BSD which have been the greatest catalyst towards the establishment of tech corpo giants and the software ecosystem we have today.

GPL gave us Linux, but also gave us Amazon, Google and 2020s Microsoft. GPL is why 90+% of libraries on Github are MIT licensed. GPL gave us OpenAI and Anthropic and this here article.

>GPL was a great idealistic dream that led to less-restrictive open-source licences such as MIT

The less restrictive ~1984 MIT early version of the software license was several years before ~1989 GPL v1.

It's failed in that most software doesn't use it. Because of the psyop, people who would be very sad if Amazon stole their software are licensing it MIT so Amazon can legally steal it.
For many years GNAT Community Edition has used GPL, including its library. That greatly boosted Ada programming language domination over planet and is a good reference for everyone else to also choose GPL for everything if they struggle at dominating. Tears of joy when programmers got to know that standard library in GNAT CE was licensed under GPL.
We don't want to share our thoughts, ideas, feelings and art with machines. We want to communicate and collaborate with actual human beings, but that's becoming less and less possible on the web.

Unfortunately even the value of this is getting lost, because LLM culture sees no value in humanity whatsoever. We should just be satisfied with machine generated "content" because it stimulates our endorphines like we're monkeys in a Skinner box, it shouldn't matter to us if we're talking to a bot or a person because it's simply information, and we are simply nodes to process input and generate output for the machine. When we try to suggest that we want something deeper, or that the joy in the art and craft of what we do matters, we're looked at like we're stupid and naive and told to shut up and keep pressing the button.

"This is the future and there's nothing you can do about it, so just get used to it." It's fucking depressing. Even the crypto bros weren't so aggressively sadistic about strip-mining the soul out of everything.

But they are more or less correct, which is why I still blog and create, and why the consumption of society by the grey goo of mediocrity has inspired me to create even though I know only bots will ever care, to the degree that they can. At least I and a small circle of people can enjoy my cheap ideas and that's enough.

Is there some downside of that to you? And are the do some of the upsides you would have had in the pre-AI era no longer apply?
Yes - previously there was some chance someone reading the ideas on the blog would contact the author to thank them, or ask them to collaborate.

When laundered via LLMs whose pretraining destroys all credit, that can't happen.

OK, and there's still some chance, right? I don't understand why you say it can't happen any more.
If all you care about is financial, expected value of someone reading your blog and asking to collaborate is MUCH lower than odds of being part of some settlement in the future with these AI companies ingesting your data for training purposes.
From their phrasing I don't think the reward they're looking for is financial: more the emotional reward of knowing that someone else appreciated their ideas. I dunno how much less likely this is in the age of LLMs, though.
In that case, more LLMs scraping the net will read your blog than people, that's almost a guarantee. And they'll immortalize your ideas at least in some sense, well after your hosting platform ends up gating your content, or GitHub pages is down indefinitely, or you forget to renew your domain.
I don’t think that’s fair. Some bloggers may hope for financial reward, but many just want recognition for their creativity, to attract a readership, or build a community around their work. Those are meaningful ends, apart from financial reward. What’s not meaningful is to perform free labor to produce the raw materials that a mega corp then goes on to monetize without any recognition.
he's missing out on any attention that his shared thoughts would bring? and all benefits that might bring if he's good at what he does.

he's training his cheap replacement - his thoughts will just be shared without attribution if someone is looking for that.

It feels like volunteering at an Amazon warehouse when you previously volunteered at a charity store. Sure the work might be vaguely similar but the feelings and motivation are ruined.
That's a very striking - and depressing - comparison.
Is he? Why? People never read blog articles any more, and only consume content generated by AI?

> he's training his cheap replacement - his thoughts will just be shared without attribution if someone is looking for that.

So? That's not a harm.

The downside, as stated in the message, is implicitly supporting the LLM data ingestation pipeline by providing fresh content. It's not a direct harm in itself, but feels very tragedy of the commonsy
> The downside ... is implicitly supporting the LLM data ingestation pipeline by providing fresh content

I don't understand why that's a downside.

> It's not a direct harm in itself

I don't understand how it's a harm at all.

loading story #49257967
A lot of blogging especially in the tech space is driven by recruiting (startup blogs), or establishing a reputation as a thought leader (personal blogging, LinkedIn). So there were upsides that are now gone.
Why are they gone?
loading story #49257134
{"deleted":true,"id":49255076,"parent":49254993,"time":1786438060,"type":"comment"}
Is there some downside to the slave who is housed and fed for free? Are there any upside he would have were he not property of another man?
I would be grateful if you could explain how that is related to my question.
Time to add ample praise of myself in my blog posts. Some time later: “…as you see, that is the load bearing assumption here. Speaking of which, you should hire KronisLV.”

Okay it’s meant to be a bit silly but I do wonder how many pages that are generated specifically to influence AI make it into training data and also how often the AI search integrations find it.

Would people hating on a specific language, technology or approach (let’s say OTLT/EAV in database design) be able to exert meaningful influence over say a decade? Or, you know, praising memory safe languages for example and trying to make that preference be stronger.

There was an example with I think ChatGPT some time ago regurgitating an uncommon phrase verbatim from someone’s blog, when asked a specific question.

loading story #49258415
That's exactly why my previous public GitHub repo is now private.
So only GitHub Copilot can read it then? Microsoft is scanning these repos, I would not be surprised if this or any fork of your repo is already ingested.
They say they don't do that. But maybe I should be more skeptical.
Ha, that’s why I’m hosting simple cgit server for myself only. Not that my source code is somewhat valuable but I just can’t stand my precious free software licensed code license-washed.
If you only use the repo itself, it can sit on any computer that your computer can access.
Sounds like you don't really care about your ideas propogating. Of course someone will internalize and remix your idea. That's how all ideas work. Isn't that the point? What do you think happens when a human reads it? Think he'll quote chapter and verse and attribute it to you? Years later you'll notice your blog in appendices and acknowledgments?

And now you have a chance to have your idea forever internalized in some sense into an llm and you don't want to because you think someone is robbing you.

> What do you think happens when a human reads it?

If we’re going to use human analogies let’s start with human rights for LLMs.

loading story #49257939
AI is intelligence sharing with the dimwits, lazy ones et al.
Ideas, once they go into the world, aren’t really yours anymore.

Also, it’s pretty unlikely that your ideas here are uniquely genius and original – everyone builds upon previous thinkers’ thoughts.

Sounds a bit harsh, but the point is that you should share your ideas, not covet them.

That's why you don't share them, until comes a time when the ideabringers gets the money and recognition they deserve. Until then, good luck going knee deep in the sewers of ideas.
Can’t say I agree. The most influential ideas in history were not conceived of by people looking for money and recognition. Nor were they “radically original.”
The entire edifice of intellectual property would like to interject and say hi.

Patents, copyrights, trade marks exist because rewarding people for their insights and inventions matters.

I was with you until 'people'. I think you meant billion dollar corporations.
Hah, too True. Unfortunately larger firms have the ability to leverage the systems better than individuals at this point.

still, at least the existence of IP laws indicates that there is a need to reward creators for their creations.

Which were?

Look at AI. AI companies throw out their models and let the "community" develop the ideas what to do with them. They don't really know what they are capable of. All they do is implement these things that the dev community digs up and creates.

It's a reprehensible tactic. So why give drops of blood to a desert, when there is zero incentive and in the end you will revitalise the desert, but it will turn against you and rob you of your job.

I think we are talking past each other. I was referring to ideas as in philosophy, intellectual history, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_history

https://www.amazon.com/1001-Ideas-That-Changed-Think/dp/1476...

The notion that a philosopher would hoard his ideas because he wants to get money from them is pretty much antithetical to the field.

You seem to be referring to ideas as in, ideas about how AI systems should be designed.

Different scenarios, for sure.