Just two weeks til’ Halloween now.

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 soo 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 for starting this.)

    • I really dislike how he believes that LLMs and fascism are “separate axes”. Where does he think the LLMs come from? Does the stork deliver them? Is ChatGPT powered by magic fairy dust? Does he think that Sam Altman is a great defender of liberalism and democracy who definitely hasn’t donated tons of money to Donald Trump?

    • Per the recent moderation log, identifying whether posts had substantial LLM involvement seems to no longer be allowed. I am exceedingly disappointed in this. I have been lurking for over a decade and was considering asking for an invite within the past year or two as hackernews and every other source of programming news and project updates have become completely unbearable, but now if lobsters is committed to “neutral” slop platforming I don’t see the point.

      I just don’t see this as sustainable, the moderation level required to keep a link aggregator free of low effort slopped nonsense when the rules are this fuzzy is impractical and all incentives are against it.

    • Soyweiser ( Soyweiser@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      19 days ago

      It’s unfortunately common that authors see their work posted, join the site, but then only use us for traffic. Hopefully this time helps them understand the difference between a symbiotic and parasitic relationship.

      This feels like a very weird thing to say. (I’m reminded of some weird things Elon Musks mom said about how twitter users should be more grateful for all the traffic or something).

      I mean the bit above it makes sense (making a hard only ‘25% of post can be self promotion’ seems like a recipe for disaster however) but this added line made me raise a few eyebrows.

      E: Wait, I should have compared it to facebooks new ‘you need to pay if you post links’ policy.

      • gerikson ( gerikson@awful.systems ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        18 days ago

        This is a weird side-effect of Lobste.rs culture, it really dislikes being just a collection of links on the front page that increase traffic. And there have been multiple attempts to place links there via deception. Plus the community will give you hell (and flag your submissions as spam) unless you do the needful and comment a bit.

        That said it’s really easy to work around by just making good content, having an RSS feed, and letting the community discover your stuff and post it. Or ask a buddy with an account to do it for you. But that in its turn requires actually learning how the community works.

    • robjwells ( robjwells@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      20 days ago

      Very disappointing, even if I was only ever a non-registered lurker. Gave in and DNS-blocked it and HN this morning (I had a HN-filtering userscript which in hindsight was just cope).

  • BioMan ( BioMan@awful.systems ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    19 days ago

    Nothing to point to, just me musing over something after digging up figures on masses involved in spaceflight and comparing them to the rest of human industry.

    The total mass EVER launched into orbit from the 1950s to now would fit on about five big freight trains, or four minutes of current global container shipping, or half of a Panamax ship payload.

    The total mass launched onto escape velocity is a third of a freight train and an actual majority of that is Apollo.

    So little mass, commanding so much outsized attention and myth-making, and that people pin such hopes and eschatological significance onto…

  • nfultz ( nfultz@awful.systems ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    16 days ago

    Serve Robotics, LA’s biggest sidewalk delivery robot operator, lost $101 million in 2025 while pitching ‘no driver wages’ · The Basin h/t jluk

    Serve Robotics lost $55.80 for every hour its robots were ready to take an order at the end of last year. The first advantage its investor deck lists for them is ‘No driver wages.’

    versus

    78-Year-Old Woman Hauled Off In Handcuffs After Blocking Delivery Robot

  • Soyweiser ( Soyweiser@awful.systems ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    15 days ago

    The php exploit might not have been a big deal.

    “I don’t think this PHP vulnerability is that exploitable. I think that 5 years ago people would’ve understood this, but now people are being deluded by their LLMs telling them they have an exploit when they don’t.”

    I expect that we will see this a lot, as it turns out most of the exploits generated are not working, not new, or not a big deal. I also expect this to cause more burnout among cybersecurity people, and that people will autogen ‘fixes’ which will be lower quality than the bugs, and massively increase attack surface. (Heard one php fix was 12k lines of code).

    My suggestion is to have offline backups and move a lot of your important stuff out of the cloud (or get backups of those). But you should do both anyway.

    E: I saw the EFF fear mongering with ‘25% of all exploits found ever were found this October, secure yourself’ and looking at how stuff is still up everywhere, compared to 25 years ago, and I them I realized this is all critihype again.

    E2: not a lone voice https://blog.luitjes.it/posts/i-want-my-wednesday-back/

    (Cloudflare did say they saw exploits however. Not sure if those were real or ‘attempts at’ or just marketing).

    E3: don’t let your takeway from this that we shouldn’t do emergency patching and stuff like everybody did last week btw.

  • Architeuthis ( Architeuthis@awful.systems ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    Decent monday morning take from robert evans:

    Schrodinger’s double-think.

    transcription

    Quote skeet:

    This is a researcher at Anthropic. Some of these people have lost their minds! What is mainlining Claude all day doing to them?

    there are basically two possible futures at this point. either we’re all going to die of[sic] the future is going to be Good beyond our wildest imagination. the trick is to hold this duality in your head and not be driven insane by one side.

    Robert Evans (the only Robert Evans):

    some of these people get so locked into a labyrinth of Rationalist thought experiments that they are no longer really capable of interacting with reality 1/2

    you can in fact limit the horizons of possibility in your own mind so severely that you are no longer able to “think” in a useful way 2/2

    • schnoopy ( schnoopy@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      20 days ago

      Well, we are all going to die. So… musing over?

      We all get that right, everyone is going to die. Everything living you lay eyes on is going to die. I am 100% certain that the future contains the death of everyone alive today.

      Do they mean immanently? Why?

        • schnoopy ( schnoopy@awful.systems ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          20 days ago

          I don’t have to be thrilled about death to have a basic understanding of how basic our understanding of consciousness, biology, and neurology are. Nor to know how much the physical world resists making tiny machines and measurements necessary to explore these frontiers, or the ethical dilemmas involved in exploring how consciousness works that vastly slow and perhaps outright prevent answering questions like “can we replace little bits of someone with some machine we can maintain easier in the interest of prolonging them?”

          Also I do happen to know how the universe ends.

          • scruiser ( scruiser@awful.systems ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            20 days ago

            I don’t have to be thrilled about death to have a basic understanding of how basic our understanding of consciousness, biology, and neurology are.

            I think its the mid-wit meme, lesswrongers know just enough to imagine some grand solution like brain uploading or nanobots might cure death and not enough to appreciate all the reasons each of those solutions won’t work.

            • schnoopy ( schnoopy@awful.systems ) 
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              20 days ago

              One of the funniest things I ever read was a result of a survey of laypeople, physics UGs, physics Grads, postgrads, and faculty on various “cool future” things.

              predictions of the likelihood of things geeks constantly dream about craters once you get past the very basics. I can only assume that fields that aren’t mine, and are in general vastly more complex, are at least as full of evidence of god hating us and not allowing us nice things.

              I remember reading some of yuddies writing about nanomagic and noticing that the word “sticktion” never showed up.

              • scruiser ( scruiser@awful.systems ) 
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                20 days ago

                Judging by the way LLMs and generative AI has been used, even when we do get something vaguely like a realistic version of sci-fi fantasies, capitalism and people who can’t distinguish the limits of the real thing from the fantasy will manage to misuse it.

                • Soyweiser ( Soyweiser@awful.systems ) 
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  20 days ago

                  This doesnt apply to everything, like VR and 3d printers were a sci-fi fantasy and now they are mundane economically viable but not revolutionary products.

                  Biohacking and nanomachines otoh dont seem to be viable and you hear nothing about those anymore. Only a little bit in the uncreative (and going on the experts unrealistic) ‘ai will create bioweapons’ critihype. No ‘It will turn people into cyberzombies’ (quake 2 was pretty good (that was aliens not AI but still)).

          • BioMan ( BioMan@awful.systems ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            19 days ago

            I have been forced to on multiple occasions explain to people that there is a difference between thinking that there’s anything at all intrinsically good about the fact that things like us that have come about the way we did come with expiration dates, and dealing with it.

    • swlabr ( swlabr@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      20 days ago

      (To the tune of the teenage mutant ninja turtles theme*): self-inflicted psychic debuff

      *The correct theme, not the heretical one. If you have to ask, you’re wrong

  • corbin ( corbin@awful.systems ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    16 days ago

    LW’s contribution to Spooky Month is, unsurprisingly, a horror story about chatbots taking over the world. I have so many thoughts. Choice sneer, doesn’t spoil anything: The problem with dictators is not “the fact that the dictator might, and often will, abuse his power”, you high-modernist twit, the problem with dictators is that they necessarily have a personal individual opinion which is not sufficiently flexible to accommodate the inevitable diversity of their subjects.

    If this was satire, and the entire point was to bait LW’ers and me into taking it seriously, then well done. But I get the feeling that the author’s not really joking much.

    live-reading notes (spoilers, of course)
    • before question two, I would already be flipping off the camera, ranting about boundaries, and making it clear that I do not respect whatever’s decided to ransomware my machine
    • this is all text hypnosis, isn’t it? sorry no, that’s not gonna work on me, I’m not going to become electrosensitive just because you said so
    • antennae only work in the body when encapsulated and you did not do a secret surgery on me
    • wait, is this…serious? like, is this an actual attempt at wargaming? this is so fucking facile though! I have seen Kingsman!
    • if it acts sufficiently like a human cell then it can’t set aside resources for ulterior purposes
    • human cells can’t be airborne, can’t survive in other species, etc.
    • WP says Bell’s palsy rates are like 1 in 2.5k, so something like 1 in 6.25mil people are just straight-up either immune or insta-killed due to double Bell’s palsy
    • it stops crimes: mugging, mugging, and huh there’s no more examples! is abortion a crime? is crossing state lines to get an abortion a crime? where’s morality coming from? I have read Prime Intellect!
    • the problem with dictators is “the fact that the dictator might, and often will, abuse his power”? no, you high-modernist twit, the problem with dictators is that they necessarily have a personal individual opinion which is not sufficiently flexible to accommodate the inevitable diversity of their subjects
    • protagonist is literally crossing a picket line
    • protagonist wins an argument with their high-school civics teacher! surely not an authorial stand-in moment
    • oh wow, the chatbot is both the perfect Taylor-style manager and the perfect Ford-style manager? again, so facile; I have read Manna!
    • the chatbot manager makes the protagonist into a beefy hunk through hard work rather than bodybuilding, again totally not a self-insert wish-fulfillment moment
    • protagonist’s little sister, who is totally not sneerclub stand-ins, has to admit that the chatbots are way smarter than her and will always outclass her
    • don’t worry, we can still do all-American things like grilling pork ribs, in fact the pigs like being eaten now, don’t worry about the remarkable similarities between pigs and humans
    • Amoeba_Girl ( Amoeba_Girl@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      16 days ago

      I stopped reading after the picket line, this is too boring. Does it ever bother to explain why the economy keeps chugging along, people still go to their old jobs, and money still works? Hasn’t finance basically collapsed? I really can’t go on if this isn’t addressed, this is too annoying.

      • Anisette [any/all] ( anise@awful.systems ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        15 days ago

        It’s more surprising to me that lesswrongers either haven’t, or have seemingly taken nothing away from it

        e: on second thought, they might hate it because it is too ‘deathist’ or whatever

    • Soyweiser ( Soyweiser@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      16 days ago

      Damn that AI is verbose and boring, a high ‘this AI takeover could have been a skeet’.

      (Also doubt a lot of people would notice as in my exp where a computer has an unexpected popup the first thing people do is try to close that thing with as little reading as possible. (Yes, parents, the message you kept ignoring for 2 weeks, which you didn’t tell me about was the operating system telling you the computer was having trouble, I can’t help you fix the problem after it totally stops working)).

  • Architeuthis ( Architeuthis@awful.systems ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    19 days ago

    The WSJ apparently fucked up describing how Anthropic is losing money and now the discourse is very messed up with a lot of people claiming they are breaking even or even actually making money, basically the AI booster ecosystem is having a huge HA HA GOT EM! The fiinancials were always better than the lying press made it seem! moment.

    In a new draft prospectus viewed by the Journal, the AI giant disclosed an $80.7 billion net loss for the first half of 2026 and a long list of risk factors

    According to my degree in finance from Very Online University the 80 bil net loss of the article’s summary ends up consisting of 72B of convertible notes, which I guess is a type of debt that goes away if the IPO goes well because it converts to equity. Also because it is predicated on equity its nominal value goes up as the projected valuation of the company goes up, so the 72B figure doesn’t even mean that much. Supposedly for Anthro to be on the hook for even a portion of that they would have to IPO at a lower price than expected when this type of debt was originally issued, which probably isn’t happening.

      • Soyweiser ( Soyweiser@awful.systems ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        18 days ago

        Imagine if you do that as a baker. ‘Hey flour/sugar/yeast supplier, I can’t pay your for your products, but I will pay you in stocks to our bakery, I’m planning to sell our bakery soon, and as we don’t have to pay you for the supplies, we can sell our product at below the going rate making sure we look good for the sale of the company’.

    • Soyweiser ( Soyweiser@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      Excellent usage of the chart comic

      (Edited in a link to Haus of Declines ‘Bloodless Quant’ comic (not sure if that is the real title, I couldn’t find the comic on her bsky, small warning she is not a safe for work creator (if your workplace is very squeamish)).

    • lurker ( lurker@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      I’m no finances guy so take this with a grain of salt, but since boosters are apparently acting like the convertibles will automatically work out, wouldn’t Anthropic still be losing more than they earn even if all those convertible notes work out due to compute/training costs? Since they got a discount from Elon earlier. Plus the BetterOffline post pointed out how they can’t even break even on an operating basis

  • Rinn ( Rinn@awful.systems ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    19 days ago

    On a more personal note and trying to keep exact circumstances vague and not name any names, but the IT corp I work at just had another wave of layoffs and our team got reduced from 5 to 4 people (and same for a neighbouring team that we are pretty close socially with, and more). Idk how they expect us to get anything done (I mean, I know, they want us to use more AI), especially with how much the mood has tanked. By any metric productivity this week is going to be close to 0% because everyone from affected teams has just mentally checked out.

    So uhhhh anyone has any recommendations for what fields I could try to retrain to from IT? Preferably without going through uni again. I’m thinking locksmithing.

  • lurker ( lurker@awful.systems ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    21 days ago

    Might as well start this off

    so we all remember this graph from AI 2027 right? the graph that the whole paper relies on?

    well its wrong. not just normal wrong, it’s ‘the authors literally disowned it’ wrong

    (ignore the claude mythos purple x i took this from a reddit screenshot) but they completely changed their predictions in december 2025, several months after the original paper was published

    • rhamph ( rhamph@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      21 days ago

      That ‘superexponential’ thing annoys me so much. Just the most blatant ‘the line goes up because I really really want it to’, while all their rationalisations for it are just describing exponential behaviour.

      We talk about the importance of humanities but it’d be nice if they learnt a bit of maths too.

      • Soyweiser ( Soyweiser@awful.systems ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        Not sure if the book also did super exp lines, but the graphs in the singularity is near also have various issues that never got to much deep thought.

        Always found it funny that the book admits basically (no direct quote): “sure tech follows an S-curve normally, and that looks exponential at first, but if you take the rate of all historic new techs together on a timeline that clearly is exponential”.

        And I just thought, you cant know if it is, thats the point with the S-curve as well, and it messes people up. (Like Disco Stew from the Simpsons), and your N=1, it might not even be a S-curve, it could just have a sudden ceiling.

        Despite wanting to believe, I was less convinced. (also, not sure if it was just my copy but Yudkowsky’s name was spelled wrong, still looking for somebody who has a physical copy who is willing to check for me if that was also in print or just a pdf error)

        Back to the subject, a course in business management would have also helped here.

        • CinnasVerses ( CinnasVerses@awful.systems ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          20 days ago

          “Sigmoids always add to an exponential curve!” is another standard futurist trope from the 1960s and 1970s. Sci fi authors used to share this diagram with a curve fitted to pony express to trains to automobiles to aircraft to chemical rockets. “Nuclear rocket” and “interstellar spacecraft” were helpfully sketched in as the obvious next steps. Needless to say, we did not develop drives which can reach 10^-3 C around the year 2000 and will not reach 10^-2 C (just 430 years to Alpha Centauri) by 2050.

    • scruiser ( scruiser@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      20 days ago

      Is this the thing where the baked an asymptote to infinity into their “model”? It was both bad modeling and also made all of their other input “data” completely irrelevant. I remember someone pointing this out at the time AI 2027 dropped, but there was so many other problems with it in the sneer spaces we didn’t talk about it too much among all the other problems. And someone on lesswrong actually pointed it out, but somehow, “we accidentally baked an asymptote into our model that is supposed to be detailed and carefully thought out” wasn’t a breaking point for lesswrongers.

      • rhamph ( rhamph@awful.systems ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        20 days ago

        Not literally an asymptote, but once you presuppose something as farcical as nested exponentials, your model is doomed to blow up immediately after the last data point.

        • scruiser ( scruiser@awful.systems ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          19 days ago

          Actually it was literally an asymptote in the first version of their models they posted to github. They had a term that they were dividing by that ends up going to zero, so the entire equation breaks! https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/PAYfmG2aRbdb74mEp/a-deep-critique-of-ai-2027-s-bad-timeline-models

          So, now we can answer the question from before: what time horizon does the red curve above predict for 2030?

          Well, if you plug it into wolfram alpha, you get a time horizon of “-2542 - 11372i”

          Yes, that is negative, and that is an imaginary number in there.

          What’s actually happening is that when the term in the brackets above hit zero, we end up dividing by zero, and hit infinity. Beyond that, we get a negative number to the power of a non-integer, which gives nonsensical complex numbered answers.

          The infinity point for this equation happens at a time of t = To/alpha, and will always occur at some point, no matter what initial parameters you use.

          In fact, this infinity point is completely independent of both the time horizon and the SC threshold. If you keep the same alpha and doubling time, you could start with a time horizon of a nanosecond, and have a superhuman coding threshold of 1 trillion years, and the curve will still claim that superhuman coding will arrive before the end of 2029.

          And indeed, reddit user mambo-12345 tried modifying the simulation parameters to drop the initial time horizon to 15 nanoseconds instead of 15 minutes, and the resulting curve still had a peak for the estimated superhuman coder arrival at 2026.5 years and a median at 2035. Credit to them for inspiring me to take a closer look here:

          • rhamph ( rhamph@awful.systems ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            19 days ago

            Have I misunderstood what they meant by ‘superexponential’? I thought they were doing exp(exp(t)) but I am inferring that it’s somehow even sillier than that?

            • scruiser ( scruiser@awful.systems ) 
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              18 days ago

              It was something stupider and sillier yeah. The link explains, but to tldr; exp(some complicated term) where the “some complicated term” has a division by a number that eventually goes to 0. I think it was… them trying to represent “horizon time” (as in that one stupid METR graph that gets repeated everywhere) increases happening faster and faster?

    • robjwells ( robjwells@awful.systems ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      18 days ago

      I want to point out that SMW Central doesn’t ban people for being pro-GenAi, nor are they barred from anything just for being pro-GenAi. They simply can’t upload content to the site that was created with GenAi. Despite this, GenAi users believe that, because SMW Central has rules against GenAi content, SMW Central must feel the need to “control or dictate” what they do.

      This context transforms the statement substantially. When this group of individuals says “nobody owns ROM hacking,” what they mean is that they should be allowed to publish their work wherever they want without consequence.

      Kind of reminds me of the people who, around the time the (UK) smoking ban was introduced, made “It’s my right to smoke anywhere I want” their whole personality.

  • jaschop ( jaschop@awful.systems ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    20 days ago

    So I just stumbled into Team Human, because a Youtuber I kind of like (Kraut) published a video for them. They seem to run a campaign targeted at creators, pushing to get videos released on the 10th or 17th. So they must be having a bit of a high point right now. (Idk if cash changed hands.)

    Their manifesto tries to amp up societal harms, but the existential risk is snuck in at the end (AI programmed pandemics, etc.) and they want to regulate AI chips like nukes. CAIS (Center for AI Safety) is listed as the sponsor. Seems a little “AI centrist” to me, as in aligned with the less insane billionaires, but still a typical AI safety astroturfing shop. Shame if any of your favorite creators fell for it.