Thread

1. jtrn · 1790087529 · focus · HN ↗

   The correct title: Researcher brakes one specific stubborn historic enigma message with good help from Astra.

   Stubborn for a long time because the message used a completely different key from the rest of that day's traffic. Everyone assumed it shared the daily key. The original transcription had errors. The left rotor turned over at letter 72, which is rare and breaks standard crib attacks.

   What is cool, if true, is that it was a 2 day collab between the Leffer and Astra. To me this shows the importance of human in the loop, was still all also showing how immensely power of llm tools. But I think it’s getting a bit silly how much anrticles ignores the driving force (the person) in breakthroughs like this.

   1. serbuvlad · 1790091726 · focus · HN ↗

      Even if this is true, we must avoid falling into the trap of Kasparov of betting on Centaur Chess.

      Just like with Kasparov's Centaur Chess, the idea of a 'human in the loop' is just a necessity due to current limitations.

      There will hopefully (?) come a time one day when human beings provide only ultimate value judgments, and everything else is done by machines. Or it may not.

      But I don't think betting your ego on the idea that you will be useful in the loop for very long is very wise.

      1. skybrian · 1790093039 · focus · HN ↗

         This is a bit too future-oriented. Let's not mix up current capabilities and speculation about future capabilities. For the time being, collaboration works well. What the future brings is uncertain.

         1. ctoth · 1790093268 · focus · HN ↗

            > This is a bit too future-oriented.

            This? Still? After everything?

            Buddy, you're living in the future. In a science fiction novel. Please get used to it.

            1. skybrian · 1790093532 · focus · HN ↗

               It's good to think about where you're going, but you also have to keep track of where you are.

               (Also, getting people to think about the future rather than the present is a classic con. Looking at an empty field: "can't you just see the potential here?")

            2. pyrale · 1790095168 · focus · HN ↗

               > Please get used to it.

               The novel title: "Don’t Build The Torment Nexus".

            3. sifar · 1790100793 · focus · HN ↗

               If there is one thing I have realized after reading quite a few science fiction books, it is that I don't want to live in any one them - not one.

               Unfortunately, there are enough people in the world who think that is the future everyone should live in and are actively working to bring it about.

               And so, one must adapt. .

               1. myrmidon · 1790164875 · focus · HN ↗

                  > If there is one thing I have realized after reading quite a few science fiction books, it is that I don't want to live in any one them - not one.

                  I find this suprising kinda. If I got a choice right now, there's a bunch of dystopian Scifi that I would instantly go for (out of sheer curiosity), e.g. the Murderbot universe.

                  Are there fantasy worlds that you would want to live in? I feel this is a bit of a suspect benchmark in the first place because books typically want some kind of tension/conflict which you won't get if everyone is just gratefully living their best life.

                  1. anthonyrstevens · 1790180578 · focus · HN ↗

                     Alan Dean Foster created some very appealing universes.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.