What are the most upvoted users of Hacker News commenting on? Powered by the /leaders top 50 and updated every thirty minutes. Made by @jamespotterdev.
This discussion got me curious: how much data are you all hoarding?
For me, the media library is less than 4TB. I have some datasets that, put together, go to 20TB or so. All this is handled with a microserver with 4 SATA spinning metal drives (and a RAID-1 NVMe card for the OS and).
I would imagine most HN'ers to be closer to the 4TB bracket than the 40TB one. Where do you sit?
The Amiga is a very interesting case. It started out extremely capable, with a complex architecture with multiple coprocessors tightly coupled to memory and the CPU.
As time passed, that complexity made it more difficult to build newer, better Amigas that were compatible with the software already written for it. All its unique features - graphics, 2D acceleration, audio - made it complicated to improve the machine. The PC, on the other hand, was very easy - you could throw out your CGA card and get an EGA or VGA, the same way you could plug in a generic sound card and get MIDI and PCM audio, along with an IDE port for a CD-ROM.
If the value proposition held, it could have survived longer, but this business of getting a new computer in order to get better video output gets expensive very quickly. I had EGA on my 10MHz XT-compatible and it was great.
Commodore was stuck in the 8-bit home computer model - mostly non-upgradable machines. This was the 1000 (it had a little upgradability), the 500, the 600, and the 1200. The 2000, 3000, and 4000 were seen as their professional counterparts, but they were all saddled by being compatible with games written for their built-in video and audio hardware that was quickly becoming inadequate compared to PCs.
Sadly, Atari didn't have as much custom hardware it would need to evolve, but still never quite made the leap from their self-contained machines to more modular ones that'd make it easier to compete with PCs. When they did, they opted for the VME bus instead of something simpler (such as a 16-bit ISA bus).
Impressively, near their deaths, both made PCs, but the PCs didn't share anything with their proprietary jewels. Both companies should know much better.
"I have only been ruined but twice in my life — once, when I lost a lawsuit, and once when I won one." — Voltaire
The photo shown at the top of the story is of a 1945 prototype.
We’ll all die of cringe when we need to figure out what happened ;-)
While an untrained human can go far with an AI on their side, a trained one who knows how to operate the AI tooling can do a whole lot more.
It was about time we stopped forcing humans to code CRUDs.
And that is why when no one pays the budget for doing tooling upgrades in big corps, the tooling never gets updated.
We did just fine without those for many decades.
It is the openess religion that eventually loses sight of what customers and businesses alike care about and keep alive on the market.
Lisp has one of the most powerful macro systems.
Also when people say Lisp in 2025, usually we can assume Common Lisp, which is far beyond the Lisp 1.5 reference manual in capabilities.
In fact, back when I was in the university, Caml Light was still recent, Miranda was still part of programming language lectures, the languages forbidden on compiler development assignments were Lisp and Prolog, as they would make it supper easy assignment.
I don't know, it's not that profound of an insight. You throw away color information, the image gets blocky. You throw away frequency information, the image gets blurry. You throw away semantic information, shit stops making sense :).
Still, if someone would turn that into a blog post, I'd happily read it.
GCC was largely ignored until Sun became the first UNIX vendor to have different SKUs for developers and plain users, quickly followed by other vendors.
Only then folks started reaching out to GNU, as means to avoid paying for UNIX developer licenses from their respective vendors.
Sun even had multiple levels, one of the reasons Ada didn't took off, was that UNIX vendors like Sun had it as an additional SKU, the developer license would only get the classical UNIX stuff, alongside C and C++ compilers.
Google has done nothing but make another search engine, Apple has done nothing but make another phone, Ferrari has done nothing but make another car, etc.
When I was a 70's kid growing up into the 1980's, repair shops were all over the place, for any kind of electronics.
Then suddenly we got into this throw away garbage culture at the slightest sign something stops working.
The only way back is rebooting the system, or having governments step in.
I usually get a good mileage out of jumping straight in the middle :). Like, "hmm let's look at this block; oh cool, there's enough space around it that I could push it away from goal, for whatever reason". Turns out, if it's possible there usually is a good reason. So whenever I get stuck, I skim every object in the puzzle and consider in isolation, what can I do with it, and this usually gives me anchor points to drive my forward or backward thinking through.
It is a matter who we chose to vote on, the unions we empower, the fight for sensible work protection laws.
Then again, European socialism is already too left for US capitalism mindset.
If this were a limitation in the architecture, they wouldn't be able to work with images, no?
This is true for most software nowadays
It‘s academic jargon. Desiderata are often at the end of a paper, in the section „someone should investigate X, but I‘m moving on to the next funded project“.
Did they really drop this news at Friday night, on a holiday?
I don't like it. I like salads that have tasty, fresh, delicious vegetables (and often fruits and/or nuts) where the dressing just adds some pizazz and tartness.
To me caesar salad is just dressing where the lettuce is only there to act as scaffolding.
Does Canonical really make candidates take IQ tests?
The self-service thing is such a nightmare. There are two things that you almost certainly cannot trust your marketing team with:
1. Understanding the security implications of code they add via tag manager. How good are they at auditing the third parties that they introduce to make sure they have rock-solid security? Even worse, do they understand that they need to be very careful not to add JavaScript code that someone emailed to them with a message that says "Important! The CEO says add this code right now!".
2. Understand the performance overhead of new code. Did they just drop in a tag that loads a full 1MB of JavaScript code before the page becomes responsive? Can they figure that out themselves? Are they positioned to make good decisions on trade-offs with respect to analytics compared to site performance?
That's a nice approach. Here's a similar move back in 2020, again from the SCMP.[1] This one turned a corner.
The robotic part is that all the lifters have load measurement, probably in at least 3 axes, and report stresses to the controller. Other ways of moving big structures require getting big rigid steel beams underneath to make the building strong enough to move. Like these US building moves.[2]
In five days the entire assembly was elevated 4 feet 8 inches
At a constant rate that's approximately 1.3 tenths (3.3um) per second, definitely far below the threshold for people noticing.
I think many others, including me, have also the same experience of mining a few and then either forgetting or deleting them because they thought it'd never turn out to be worth anything.
Which they can certainly afford now after the tax cut received through the passing of federal legislation.
> It’s an overstuffed bill because nobody will compromise on anything so the only way to pass a bill that has anything even remotely controversial to either party is one reconciliation bill a year.
No, and lots of controversial bills have passed other than as reconciliation bills, and especially so during trifectas where they "controversial" within the minority party but broadly supported by the majority; reconciliation is necessary to pass something that strains unity in the majority party and is uniformly opposed by (not "controversial to") the minority party, perhaps.
No, its just code that the audience recognizes: "fiscally responsible" in US politics means "opposed to social programs", in the same way that "states rights" means "supporting racial discrimination". People often criticize the people embracing those views not delivering on the things that the literal meaning of the words deliver, but the target audience for the message understands what they mean perfectly well, which is why no argument, no matter how well-delivered and well-supported by evidence, directed at the failure to deliver on the literal meaning ever budges support. It's not some kind of magically-strong propaganda that clouds people's minds, it's a message whose meaning is well-understood and arguments directed at the literal meaning are simply misdirected.
> I don’t want to jump on nvidia but I found it super weird when they clearly remote controlled a Disney bot onto the stage and claimed it was all using real time AI which was clearly impossible due to no latency and weirdly the bot verifying correct stage position in relation to the presenter. It was obviously the Disney bot just being controlled by someone off stage.
I don't know what you're referring to, but I'd just say that I don't believe what you are describing could have possibly happened.
Nvidia is a huge corporation, with more than a few lawyers on staff and on retainer, and what you are describing is criminal fraud that any plaintiff's lawyer would have a field day with. So, given that, and since I don't think people who work at Nvidia are complete idiots, I think whatever you are describing didn't happen the way you are describing it. Now, it's certainly possible there was some small print disclaimer, or there was some "weasel wording" that described something with ambiguity, but when you accuse someone of criminal fraud you want to have more than "hey this is just my opinion" to back it up.
If there was a neoliberal candidate who was halfway decent in the NYC race they could possible beat Mandami but as it is the anti-Mandami vote will be split between several competitors in the “who can be the biggest jerk?” primary. It’s a game Trump can win but nobody else.
Billionaires have to face up to taking an L once in a while. When you suppress the left to the extent that (in Germany) the SPD says “we can’t afford the welfare state” pretty soon the AfD is saying “… we can if we get rid of the migrants.”
Mandami is terrifying to those people because he’s a plain spoken person who talks to ordinary people about issues that they care about and doesn’t use weird words that scare away minorities and working class people. Guess what, billionaires can pay a little more tax and still… live their lives.
> The artwork was already there, so not sure 'discovered' is the right word.
"Discovered" is used exactly once in the article, in the sentence, "urther, the conservators discovered metal nails under some of these plaster frescoes, which they believe were likely inserted to hold in place more of the resin surface for oil painting." Seems to be exactly the right word where it is used.
It isn't used referring to the work itself, which obviously was not discovered and which the article doesn't suggest was.
> Does it make a difference now we know it was painted by Raphael himself?
It clearly makes a difference to understanding of the provenance of the piece and, from the other side, knowledge of the body of Raphael's work. Whether that's important to you will, of course, vary based on how important those issues are to you.
That's good for me but other parts of that bill the cuts in research funding are bad for me because I work on a product that is sold on a subscription basis mainly to academic organizations who might not be able to afford it. (On the other hand, the crazy political system might make the service I work on more relevant.)
I think the aftermath of the next few years may spark a reaction for the better. I think a lot of people who got behind Trump are going to wake up and realize they got screwed. I think we're going to see the people who use weird words that scare minorities away are going to be driven out as well as tired establishment like Democrats Andrew Cuomo. Mamdami looks like the future, not so much because of his policies but because of his style. He's soft spoken and plain spoken, he talks about voters and his campaign, not about himself. People who interview him who aren't inclined to agree with his policies walk away saying "He was a really nice guy and he listened to me" and that's something that really terrifies the current political class.
Maybe it's due to a more R&D-ish nature of my current work, but for me, LLMs are delivering just as much gains in the "thinking" part as in "coding" part (I handle the "communicating" thing myself just fine for now). Using LLMs for "thinking" tasks feels similar to how mastering web search 2+ decades ago felt. Search engines enabled access to information provided you know what you're looking for; now LLMs boost that by helping you figure out what you're looking for in the first place (and then conveniently searching it for you, too). This makes trivial some tasks I previously classified as hard due to effort and uncertainty involved.
At this point I'd say about 1/3 of my web searches are done through ChatGPT o3, and I can't imagine giving it up now.
(There's also a whole psychological angle in how having LLM help sort and rubber-duck your half-baked thought makes many task seem much less daunting, and that alone makes a big difference.)
> I really don't understand what Ad Nauseam is trying to achieve. It honestly seems like it benefits Google more than it hurts them.
Google is part of the problem, but they're neither the only ones nor best to target through bottom-up approaches.
> It directly hurts advertisers, but not enough that it would stop anyone from advertising.
You know the saying about XML - if it doesn't solve the problem, you are not using enough of it.
> there's nothing I can do as an advertiser. We can't stop advertising...
We know. The whole thing is a cancer[0], a runaway negative feedback loop. No single enlightened advertiser can do anything about it unilaterally. Which is why the pressure needs to go up until ~everyone wants change.
--
[0] - https://jacek.zlydach.pl/blog/2019-07-31-ads-as-cancer.html
A classic Caesar uses whole leaves; the dish was originally meant to be eaten with hands. You can have whatever preferences you like, but I don't think the attitude you're expressing it with is helpful.
> "Prompt engineers" will tell you that some specific ways of prompting some specific models will result in a "better result"... without any criteria for what a "better result" might signify.
That's what evals are for. The best developers working on LLM applications are the ones who are addressing the problem described in this quote. Here's a recent thread about that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44430117
I’m kinda stoked to see what happens when the technocrats are in peril and how they respond to the authoritarian nationalists. Enemy of my enemy is my friend sort of deal.
It takes specialized skills to get the best results out of people. For that not to be true of AI chatbots requires them to have not just human-like intelligence, but superintelligence. Or mindreading. Probably both.
> It's not about learning how to interact with AI agents. The only required skills for working with these tools are basic reading and writing skills any decent English speaker would have.
This is flatly untrue, just as the same would be untrue about getting the most out of people (but the behavioral quirks of AI systems and the ways to deal with them do not follow human psychology, so while it is inaccurate in the same way as with people, the skills needed are almost entirely unrelated.)
A well fitted N95, and good air filters at home.
> Which is equivalent to deflation, which parent suggests is harmful to bitcoin's viability.
Deflation is built into Bitcoin by design and is one of its most notable features regarding its coin growth schedule. This pros and cons of that approach have been discussed ad infinitum in the crypto community.
Being precise with language and defining specifications based on domain knowledge is generally creative. The better analogy is product design rather than product management.
I suppose a lot of people are going to die prematurely instead of getting care. That’s a policy choice. Have a conservation with your Congressional rep about it, if it matters to you.
Do you think you can convince people of reproductive age to have kids in this environment? Or do you think people are going to opt out while the wealthy get wealthier? This will speed the decline of US total fertility rate, out of self preservation in a socioeconomic environment that provides no support to parents and the poor.
https://www.axios.com/local/dallas/2025/07/03/snap-medicaid-...
https://www.axios.com/2025/07/03/trump-big-beautiful-bill-sn...
https://www.axios.com/2025/07/01/real-cost-health-coverage-l...
Theremin.
Here's someone playing a theremin who's reasonably good.[1]
2.5Gbps is selected for price reasons. Not only is the NIC cheap, but so is the networking hardware.
But yeah, if you want fast storage just stick the SSD in your workstation, not on a mini PC hanging off your 2.5Gbps network.
Do not want. More dumbing down and opaqueing? This is as stupid as what happened to Windows' BSoDs.
When doomsday predictions have not held true for decades, it's nothing but FUD to scare the population into increasingly authoritarian control.
You should always be skeptical of science. That's why it's science and not religion. I thought we all learned that lesson in 2020.
Blocking Google Tag Manager script injection seems to have few side effects. Blocking third party cookies also seems to have few side effects. Turning off Javascript breaks too much.
"delves" is stereotypical LLM-ese to me. I don't think I've ever heard a real human use that word before LLMs became common.
Amusingly, the article talks about "improving equity in science". The linked article, "AI tools can improve equity in science" has a link to Google Scholar.[1] The summary there begins "The global space industry is growing rapidly—the number of satellites in orbit is expected to increase from 9000 today to over 60,000 by 2030 . In addition, it is estimated that more than 100 trillion untracked pieces of old satellites ...". That's because Google Scholar hit a paywall and treated the following unrelated letter as the content.
So it looks like the authors used some tool to generate plausible citation links, which they did not read before publishing.
They did some real work. Here's their list of "excess style words", ones whose frequency has increased substantially since LLMs:
accentuates, acknowledges, acknowledging, addresses, adept, adhered, adhering, advancement, advancements, advancing, advocates, advocating, affirming, afflicted, aiding, akin, align, aligning, aligns, alongside, amidst, assessments, attains, attributed, augmenting, avenue, avenues, bolster, bolstered, bolstering, broader, burgeoning, capabilities, capitalizing, categorized, categorizes, categorizing, combating, commendable, compelling, complicates, complicating, comprehending, comprising, consequently, consolidates, contributing, conversely, correlating, crafted, crafting, culminating, customizing, delineates, delve, delved, delves, delving, demonstrating, dependability, dependable, detailing, detrimentally, diminishes, diminishing, discern, discerned, discernible, discerning, displaying, disrupts, distinctions, distinctive, elevate, elevates, elevating, elucidate, elucidates, elucidating, embracing, emerges, emphasises, emphasising, emphasize, emphasizes, emphasizing, employing, employs, empowers, emulating, emulation, enabling, encapsulates, encompass, encompassed, encompasses, encompassing, endeavors, endeavours, enduring, enhancements, enhances, ensuring, equipping, escalating, evaluates, evolving, exacerbating, examines, exceeding, excels, exceptional, exceptionally, exerting, exhibiting, exhibits, expedite, expediting, exploration, explores, facilitated, facilitates, facilitating, featuring, formidable, fostering, fosters, foundational, furnish, garnered, garnering, gauged, grappling, groundbreaking, groundwork, harness, harnesses, harnessing, heighten, heightened, hinder, hinges, hinting, hold, holds, illuminates, illuminating, imbalances, impacting, impede, impeding, imperative, impressive, inadequately, incorporates, incorporating, influencing, inherent, initially, innovative, inquiries, integrates, integrating, integration, interconnectedness, interplay, intricacies, intricate, intricately, introduces, invaluable, investigates, involves, juxtaposed, leverages, leveraging, maintaining, merges, methodologies, meticulous, meticulously, multifaceted, necessitate, necessitates, necessitating, necessity, notable, noteworthy, nuanced, nuances, offering, optimizing, orchestrating, outlines, overlook, overlooking, paving, persist, pinpoint, pinpointed, pinpointing, pioneering, pioneers, pivotal, poised, pose, posed, poses, posing, predominantly, preserving, pressing, promise, pronounced, propelling, realm, realms, recognizing, refine, refines, refining, remarkable, renowned, revealing, reveals, revolutionize, revolutionizing, revolves, scrutinize, scrutinized, scrutinizing, seamless, seamlessly, seeks, serves, serving, shaping, shedding, showcased, showcases, showcasing, signifying, solidify, spanned, spanning, spurred, stands, stemming, strategically, streamline, streamlined, streamlines, streamlining, struggle, substantiated, substantiates, surged, surmount, surpass, surpassed, surpasses, surpassing, swift, swiftly, thorough, transformative, typically, ultimately, uncharted, uncovering, underexplored, underscore, underscored, underscores, underscoring, unexplored, unlocking, unparalleled, unraveling, unveil, unveiled, unveiling, unveils, uphold, upholding, urging, utilizes, varying, versatility, warranting, yielding.
That's the vocabulary of business hype. Those are words that appear frequently in company press releases, and are copied into business publications by cut-and-paste journalists. LLMs asked to polish scientific material will use that vocabulary, even in scientific writing. If you trained an LLM on scientific publications, you'd get more scientific jargon, probably misused.
[1] https://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?title=AI+tools+can...
If you have $8B in BTC, is there any reasonable way to turn that into any fiat currency? USD, EUR, anything? Can you even buy that much USDC?
Did you actually try the game? It has a pretty unique gameplay element to it. I'd say that's where they passion and creativity comes in.
Glad this was the top comment. It is extremely easy to "leave tech" (or, as you point out, leave "big tech") - you just have to accept that you will most likely make substantially less money and that your "standard of living" will have to adjust accordingly.
I put "standard of living" in scare quotes because I strongly believe that, after a certain point in the US, people are conditioned by society and marketing to spend gobs of money on shit that doesn't make them happier and often actively makes them feel worse. I'm going through the process of moving and downsizing, and I can't even begin to go through the gobs of crap in my house that I'm throwing or giving away. Even home ownership itself is something that I feel is a bad lie - you're signing up to spend huge amounts of money to live in a box where you'll also need to spend huge amounts of money to slow its inevitable decay.
But I digress. The main point is that leaving (or changing) tech is easy, but you just have to have an honest conversation with yourself about how much you, your family and your self image requires a lot of money.
I tried to build a simple static HTML game for the board game Just One, where you get a text box, type a word in, and it's shown full screen on the phone. There's a bug where, when you type, the text box jumps around, and none of the four LLMs I tried managed to fix it, no matter how much I prompted them. I don't know how you guys manage to one-shot entire games when I can't even stop a text box from jumping around the screen :(
Yes. That, and a shit ton of work done - work I wouldn't manage to do, or wouldn't even try, without AI tools.
Right. That's what got me into tech, too. Turned out to be mostly a lie - most jobs aren't making anything exciting or new (except maybe for the wealthy in the financial sense), and those that do tend to limit your autonomy.
Now I stay in tech for the same reason most people stay in their careers - it's comfortable and pays well, but because that's mostly a function of "time served"[0], it also means that I'm trapped now. I can't just switch fields anymore - at this stage of life, switching is a major multi-year project!
(Also I question whether it would help. Working in some field never looks much like you imagine while being outside of it.)
--
[0] - Tech has an unusually large multiplier here, but the trend is the same as with any other job.
> We invented PHP and FastCGI mainly to get away from the performance hit of starting a new process just to handle a web request!
Yes! Note that the author is using a technology that wasn't available when I too was writing cgi_bin programs in the 00's: Go. It produces AOT compiled executables but is also significantly easier to develop in and safer than trying to do the same with C/C++ in the 00's. Back then we tended to use Perl (now basically dead). Perl and Python would incur significant interpreter startup and compilation costs. Java was often worse in practice.
> I have seen AWS Lambda described as the CGI model reborn and that's a pretty fair analogy.
Yes, it's almost exactly identical to managed FastCGI. We're back to the challenges of deployment: can't we just upload and run an executable? But of course so many technologies make things much, much more complicated than that.
> Dothey do requirement gatherings?
This is true, but they have helped prepare me with good questions to ask during those meetings!
> Do they do the analysis? Removing specs that conflict with each other, validating what's possible in the technical domain and in the business domain?
Yes, I have had LLMs point out missing information or conflicting information in the spec. See above about "good questions to ask stakeholders."
> Do they help with design? Helping coming up with the changes that impact the current software the least, fitting in the current architecture and be maintainable in the feature.
Yes.
I recently had a scenario where I had a refactoring task that I thought I should do, but didn’t really want to. It was cleaning up some error handling. This would involve a lot of changes to my codebase, nothing hard, but it would have taken me a while, and been very boring, and I’m trying to ship features, not polish off the perfect codebase, so I hadn’t done it, even though I still thought I should.
I was able to ask Claude “hey, how expensive would this refactoring be? how many methods would it change? What’s the before/after diffs on a simple affected place, and one of the more complex affected places look like?
Previously, I had to use my hard-won human intuition to make the call about implementing this or not. It’s very fuzzy. With Claude, I was able to very quickly quantify that fuzzy notion into something at least close to accurate: 260 method signatures. Before and after diffs look decent. And this kind of fairly mechanical transformation is something Claude can do much more quickly and just as accurately as I can. So I finally did it.
That I shipped the refactoring is one point. But the real point is that I was able to quickly focus my understanding of the problem, and make a better, more informed decision because of it. My gut was right. But now I knew it was right, without needing to actually try it out.
> Not a true debate or weighing options based on the organization context.
This context is your job to provide. They will take it into account when you provide it.
> Do they help with coding?
Yes.
> Do they help with testing? Coming up with tests plan, writing test code, running them, analysing the output of the various tools and producing a cohesive report of the defects?
Yes, absolutely.
> Do they help with maintenance? Taking the same software and making changes to keep it churning on new platforms, through dependencies updates and bug fixes?
See above about refactoring to improve quality.
I got my start in the CGI era, and it baked into me an extremely strong bias against running short-lived subprocesses for things.
We invented PHP and FastCGI mainly to get away from the performance hit of starting a new process just to handle a web request!
It was only a few years ago that I realized that modern hardware means that it really isn't prohibitively expensive to do that any more - this benchmark gets to 2,000/requests a second, and if you can even get to a few hundred requests a second it's easy enough to scale across multiple instances these days.
I have seen AWS Lambda described as the CGI model reborn and that's a pretty fair analogy.
If battery life is the only/main concern, sure
As a mirrorless photographer I use a lot of processing to create a unique look. If I at all can, I set the aperture really small, use denoising, sharpening and color grading. If people think my photo came out of an old book that’s great.
I have looked at various “film look” filters and so far haven’t found one I like. When I think “film grains” I think of irregular shaped crystals, but most of the fake film grain I’ve seen makes a square pixel grain which doesn’t convince me at all. My understanding is the grain already exists before the image is shot in the sense that the films has irregular “pixels” which respond more or less because of shot noise and variation of the grain and I haven’t found anything that really simulates this.
What does “worst” mean in this context? Countries often want to keep their currency weak because it helps their exports: https://www.investopedia.com/trading/chinese-devaluation-yua... https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/devaluation.asp
When you say agents should be long running, which definition of "agent" are you talking about?
That's my point: I'm pushing back against the AI hype here, and arguing that the part of our job that can be done by an LLM is far from being everything we do.
I am sure they do.
I am not sure that they weigh it in the direction you are thinking of, though.
Looks like I was the inspiration for this post then. https://bsky.app/profile/simonwillison.net/post/3lt2xbayttk2...
> Quitting programming as a career right now because of LLMs would be like quitting carpentry as a career thanks to the invention of the table saw.
The reaction to that post has been interesting. It's mainly intended to be an argument against the LLM hype! I'm pushing back against all the people who are saying "LLMs are so incredible at programming that nobody should consider programming as a career any more" - I think that's total nonsense, like a carpenter quitting because someone invented the table saw.
Analogies like this will inevitably get people hung up on the details of the analogy though. Lots of people jumped straight to "a table saw does a single job reliably, unlike LLMs which are non-deterministic".
I picked table saws because they are actually really dangerous and can cut your thumb off if you don't know how to use them.
It's clear that financial speculation is a big use for crypto, probably the biggest.
But since almost all the tokens bear neither interest nor dividends, it looks a lot more like a casino.
LLM output is crap. It’s just crap. It sucks, and is bad.
Still don't get it. LLM outputs are nondeterministic. LLMs invent APIs that don't exist. That's why you filter those outputs through agent constructions, which actually compile code. The nondeterminism of LLMs don't make your compiler nondeterministic.
All sorts of ways to knock LLM-generated code. Most I disagree with, all colorable. But this article is based on a model of LLM code generation from 6 months ago which is simply no longer true, and you can't gaslight your way back to Q1 2024.
I'd start with a dumbbell shape - two pods connected by a slender cylinder just large enough for a man to travel through, and rotating like a pinwheel.
One can add more "spokes" over time to complete the wagon wheel.
Or even just one pod with a cable and a counterweight.
Anyone is free to propose things for D, we have a process for it, or you can just post your idea in the D forum. Many do. You don't have to sit back and hope someone else does it.
What provider doesn’t suck in this space?
Seems like a just-so story to me.
A sibling comment posted a blind link whose contents address this, but (for the benefit of people who aren't likely to follow such links), recent versions of SQLite support STRICT tables which are rigidly typed, if you have a meed tor that instead of the default loose type affinity system.
Roger Ebert on Madsen’s breakout role in Reservoir Dogs:
> One of the discoveries in the movie is Madsen, who has done a lot of acting over the years (he had a good role in “The Natural“) but here emerges with the kind of really menacing screen presence only a few actors achieve; he can hold his own with the fearsome Tierney, and reminds me a little of a very mean Robert De Niro.
RIP MM
Film grain needs to die. Its time is past. Sepia photographs and running 16 FPS silent film at 24 FPS are already dead. Next, film grain.
Eastman Business Park in Rochester has been demolished.
Also, please stop putting dust and scratches on YouTube videos. Thank you.
Yeah, I think I understand the perspective mismatch now. Thanks!
> Of course, this in turn makes Star Trek (and Star Wars, and Firefly...) look even sillier, because flying in a direction perpendicular to your deck layout means you need two magic gravity fields — one to cancel out the engines and one more to give your crew a place to stand.
Don't you just need one that does the required net change in gravity magnitude and direction? Of course, Star Trek actually has two (though I don't think the second is explicitly a gravity system, but it has that effect), a relatively steady state one that provides environmental gravity (gravity generators), and one that reacts rapidly to changing conditions to offset them for crew and other contents of the ship (inertial dampeners), which handles not only ship's drive thrust, but other externally-induced accelerations.
Of course, Star Trek is supposed to be vastly farther from our current level of technology and understanding of physics than the Expanse.
"Michelle Francl wonders what makes benzene resonate with chemists."
> that's the deal in most countries
Most countries aren’t America.
> I get what you are saying, honestly, I too wonder why if so many deportations occurred under both obama and biden, why didn't anyone seem to care? Why weren't judges trying to block that from happening?
Because the Obama and Biden administrations were not going out of their way (which the Trump administration both is and is publicly flaunting that it is) to avoid providing due process under the terms of existing case law, defying "you must not deport person A to country X" orders of courts.
> But then I remember that trump is invoking the ancient "war powers act" to do them.
"Alien Enemies Act", the War Powers Act is much newer and unrelated, but not all of the controversial deportations are attached to that.
> Why didn't obama or biden have to do that if they were able to deport so many people?
The Alien Enemies Act provides a pretext for deportations with less process than traditional deportation process under regular immigration law (in fact, until the courts ruled otherwise, the Trump Administration was claiming, and treating it as if, it allowed no process at all once the act was invoked and the executive branch designated the target as an alien enemy.)
This fails to acknowledge that synthesized noise can lack the detail and information in the original noise.
When you watch a high-quality encode that includes the actual noise, there is a startling increase in resolution from seeing a still to seeing the video. The noise is effectively dancing over a signal, and at 24 fps the signal is still perfectly clear behind it.
Whereas if you lossily encode a still that discards the noise and then adds back artificial noise to match the original "aesthetically", the original detail is non-recoverable if this is done frame-by-frame. Watching at 24 fps produces a fundamentally blurrier viewing experience. And it's not subtle -- on old noisy movies the difference in detail can be 2x.
Now, if h.265 or AV1 is actually building its "noise-removed" frames by always taking into account several preceding and following frames while accounting for movement, it could in theory discover the signal of the full detail across time and encode that, and there wouldn't be any loss in detail. But I don't think it does? I'd love to know if I'm mistaken.
But basically, the point is: comparing noise removal and synthesis can't be done using still images. You have to see an actual video comparison side-by-side to determine if detail is being thrown away or preserved. Noise isn't just noise -- noise is detail too.
Excellent discussion in this thread, captures a lot of the challenges. I don't think we're a peak vibe coding yet, nor have companies experienced the level of pain that is possible here.
The biggest 'rug pull' here is that the coding agent company raises there price and kills you're budget for "development."
I think a lot of MBA types would benefit from taking a long look at how they "blew up" IT and switched to IaaS / Cloud and then suddenly found their business model turned upside down when the providers decided to up their 'cut'. It's a double whammy, the subsidized IT costs to gain traction, the loss of IT jobs because of the transition, leading to to fewer and fewer IT employees, then when the switch comes there is a huge cost wall if you try to revert to the 'previous way' of doing it, even if your costs of doing it that way would today would be cheaper than the what the service provider is now charging you.
Agreed, I am wondering if you could extract food truck data from the various licensing databases. That question arises because in some places food trucks have replaced the statistically improbable 'hole-in-the-wall' restaurant for some of the same reasons those restaurants existed, relatively low cost of entry.
Did your plan cover out of country expenses?
This is great. It really pissed me off when David Chaum locked all the cool uses of ZKPs behind a patent wall. The DigiCash folks were peak dot com greed types, their business model was "We're going to get big chunk of change out of every transaction ever so we should be valued at 1% of the worlds GDP!" And the world responded with "Yeah, no."
I really like Andy Birrells "micro-cents" which exploited the fact you could not easily reverse an MD5 hash so you one could cheaply do high confidence low value transactions at speed. Another idea that never got anywhere sadly.
ZKP ID cards and ZKP currency are both interesting things from the 90's I'd love to see in real life. Imagine I could pay you phone to phone with no network level of capability using a currency that couldn't be double spent. That was the promise of digicash. The government hated it :-). It was just like cash currency in that serial numbers could let you track the bank it left, and the bank it came back in to, but you couldn't track anywhere it had been between those two points.
Fun times. I'll have to see if some of my ZKP ideas can be built on top of this tech now.
Hamel wrote a whole lot more about the "LLM as a judge" pattern (where you use LLMs to evaluate the output of other LLMs) here: https://hamel.dev/blog/posts/llm-judge/
https://archive.ph/giFf6