The issue isn't with using AI for finding an exploit, it's with using an AI to write up the article for human consumption about it.

> it's with using an AI to write up the article for human consumption about it.

Nothing wrong with it, as soon as it is not obviously AI-generated looking and has good, high quality content.

Taste is subjective of course, but when 80% (or whatever) of your potential audience dislikes something perhaps you should just accept that it's a bad idea.

Thing is, using ML they can make more than 5 times as many articles. And I suspect those who don't object to wasting more time on an article because it was produced in a protracted way probably clock through on ads more. So annoying 80% of people might still get them more revenue in the end.

That is a fair point - hopefully there won't be any hard feelings when the 80% attempt to censor such slop from their platforms of choice. Taste is subjective and I come to HN for things that taste good. (Notably this leaves the door wide open for AI authored content with a decent tone.)

And here I think you are just making up numbers.

I’m not claiming it’s good/bad one way or the other, but it’s the reality in which we live.

I’m just saying it’s weird to call AI okay for some things, like finding the exploit, but using that same AI is somehow the line in the sand when it comes to the documentation

What is illegal about it? What law does it break?

Could these removals indicate editorial discretion that would remove § 230 protections from Facebook?

I think that would apply if they started removing user content about this. But Facebook is simply declining to accept ads about this, which doesn't seem like it would apply here.

> In an exclusive interview, hedge fund president and whistleblower Mayank Bansal breaks his silence

How interesting, a hedge fund president and whistleblower, let me google him ... Hmm, no results whatsoever except the ones pointing to this.

> The content above has been transcribed from video using a fine-tuned AI model

Oh

> > In an exclusive interview, hedge fund president

Oh.

If you feel you're missing something in a discussion centered around a news article, skimming the news article often helps.

No, that’s what headlines are for!

What if the auction gets resolved at a random (uniformly distributed) point in time in some small time interval?

> What if the auction gets resolved at a random (uniformly distributed) point in time in some small time interval?

I'd put in lowball bids and ludicrous (but plausibly deniable) offers and wait for the unreasonably-short windows.

The solution to this problem is people not wanting immediacy. (Same with scalpers.) But people like immediacy. Unfortunately, there is also political capital in railing against those who provide that immediacy. In a way, it's a stable socioeconomic system: HFT provides liquidity, market partiipants take it, activists rail against it, regulators complain and win the activists' favour.