Yeah, I think that's the tradeoff.

Löb gets you to the main idea faster, but Gödel numbering is the part that makes it feel like the system is actually doing it itself.

Without that step, it can start to feel a bit too close to the liar paradox.

Yeah. I'd say half of the work is Gödel numbering and the other half is the diagonal lemma.

This is the most apt answer I've read thus far.

It’s not really predicting “egg prices” or “inflation” — it’s mostly fitting patterns that happen to show up in those series.

The problem isn’t domain generalization, it’s that we keep pretending these models have any notion of what the data means.

People ask how one model can understand everything, but that assumes there’s any understanding involved at all.

At some point you have to ask: how much of “forecasting” is actually anything more than curve fitting with better marketing?

"curve-fitting" has a long history (centuries old) and could be regarded more as a numerical method issue.

Rigorous understanding of what is over fitting, techniques to avoid it and select the right complexity of the model, etc, are much newer. This is a statistical issue.

My point is that forecasting isn't curve fitting, even thought curve fitting is one element of it.

I don't know how I feel about LLM slop coming to HN.

The hidden cost with all of these "fix Claude" layers is that your workflow keeps moving underneath you.

Even when one helps, you're still betting it won't be obsolete or rolled into the defaults a few weeks from now.

A lot of these quizzes end up measuring whether you use the author's preferred workflow, not whether you're actually effective with the tool.

Those aren't the same thing.

Yeah, that's the interesting part.

In big systems, you usually find out what's mission-critical by seeing what still works when something goes sideways.

The bad part is that people may start writing a bit worse on purpose, just so they don't get read as AI.

I think that's the bigger issue.

Once content gets cheap, the winners are less likely to be the best creators and more likely to be the strongest gatekeepers.

I think people read it as cheap advertising because a PR isn't really the tool's output, it's team communication.

A little "made with X" in your own draft is one thing. Putting branding into a PR your coworkers have to read is another.

I don't think the risk is that they copy your app.

The risk is that they make the category a built-in feature in something people already use. At that point, copying the product and taking the customers start to look like the same problem.

Yup, pre-cog Sherlocking. The mass keeps accreting towards the already too large players.

I think a lot of people feel this, they just stop saying it out loud.

At some point I realized “adults” aren’t people who figured things out, they’re just people who got used to not knowing — which is both kind of freeing and a little unsettling.