Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | smartician's comments login

If the goal is to emulate human behavior, I'd say there is a case to be made to build for the same interface, and not rely on separate APIs that may or may not reflect the same information as a user sees.


Research seems to suggest we need exponential training data volume increases to see meaningful performance gains: https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.04125

Personally I think we've already hit a ceiling.


We have pretty much infinite training data available on YouTube. We can scale by many orders of magnitude before we run out of data. Why do you think we hit a ceiling?


Define "AI Agent"?


in this context, generative AI agents (llm-powered)


IIUC the EU basically had to force banks to implement this via a mandate. I don't see "business friendly" US lawmakers doing the same anytime soon. The joys of the Free market™!


I mean, yes, it was mandated, but I am decently confident a usable system would have emerged one way or the other. In Germany we had a standardized API for online banking (HBCI) just because banks agreed it would be reasonable to do that.


There's an interesting podcast about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpkNGMSWbYk


Wow thanks! At least the person I spoke to asked permission to impersonate me first.


They have three months to find new roles/teams. Their employment only ends if they can't.


Like finding a lunch table to sit at on your first day of school


My completely unfounded take: Culture.

In Europe, you have a millennia-long culture of classism, feudalism, aristocracy, guilds, etc., that's still somewhat ingrained in modern society. People are more content with being born into a certain class, not expecting or striving for upward mobility. You'll see people picking a profession after school and sticking with it until retirement, and it's out of the norm to switch or try to start a business.

Whereas in the US, a few hundred years ago settlers came in and had to start from scratch. It doesn't matter what you were in your previous life, everyone had an equal start (more or less), and they had to build whole cities from scratch.

I think this partly also explains the differences in salary between the US and Europe. There is a deeply ingrained sense of "ordinary workers shouldn't make more than $X, that doesn't make sense" creating a kind of tacit collusion between employers, which does not exist in this form in the US.


Did you previously search for that attraction either on Maps or Google Search?


You're assuming that all landlords are rational. Many either see it as a leveraged investment where rent is just one factor to offset their cost, hoping that appreciation will make it profitable. Or the home had strong appreciation so that their cost relative to the current value is low. Or they have some sentimental attachment to the property and rather rent it out at a loss than sell it. In California especially, they might have locked in a low property tax rate which is a fraction of what you would pay when you buy the home today. For example, my in-laws pay $700/month in property tax. If I bought their house at market price today, my property tax bill would be $3,000/month.

For example I rent a home that's currently worth $1.3 million for $3,500/month. The landlord bought it in 2004 for $570,000. Would it make sense for the landlord to sell it instead of renting it out? Maybe, but based on their original investment they're getting a good return. If I were to buy that home off of them, my monthly payment would be more than double the rent. So this works for both of us I guess.


And what's that got to do with the price of fish?

It doesn't change the facts, most people will not get amazing rental deals, your advice is wrong and it doesn't matter how many alt accounts you use Matt.

You're very badly wrong.

The irony here is that your landlord gained $3,300 a month in property value while you lost the same amount on rent. So the 7 year homeowner is absolutely destroying the renter.

So this demonstrates perfectly how, over a longer term of 7 years, you are always better off buying.


I don't know who Matt is, but I now know that you lack even basic financial knowledge. According to your logic, if I can rent a house for $1, then I'm still losing $1 and my landlord is "gaining $1 in property value". Looks like it was a bad idea to insert myself into this conversation in the first place.


I'm an SRE.

* How many days per year are you on call? About 50. Depends on whether the team is fully staffed.

* How often do you actually get a call? Right now I think it's about 0.3 pages per 12 hour shift. So once every three shifts.

* How many rotations are you in, and how many other people are in those rotations? One on-call rotation with ~8 other people. Fluctuates wildly because SRE is a high turnover job, but right now we're pretty much fully staffed.

* Do you get any time off or additional compensation for being on call? Two thirds for time outside business hours. So a 12 hour shift on the weekend gives a full day off (or the monetary equivalent), even when you don't get paged at all.

* Do you get any time off or additional compensation for responding to an incident? No, except for a potential spot bonus for handling a huge outage.


Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

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

Search: