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.
Kant on AI:
Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why so many people, even after nature has long since declared them of age (naturaliter maiorennes), nevertheless choose to remain immature throughout their lives; and why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as their guardians. It is so convenient to be immature. If I have a book that thinks for me, a pastor who has a conscience for me, a doctor who judges my diet for me, and so on, then I need not exert myself. I have no need to think, as long as I can pay; others will take care of that tedious business for me.
(Translated with DeepL)
Important background: https://investor.gamestop.com/news-releases/news-details/202...
CEO gets paid "only if GameStop achieves a market capitalization of $20 billion." Buying a $55bn company would certainly achieve that quickly. I'm not sure how they'd manage that (buy with what? Memes?), other than the should-be-illegal process of putting debt on the acquired company's balance sheet.
And everything continues to turn to shit
I have a slightly different story, told by a Romanian coworker who was old enough to have worked in a factory under Ceaucescu: the workers stole from the factory, all the time, at every level. Managers would be able to take away complete items for "testing"; ordinary line workers would be limited to what parts they could plausibly conceal in their overalls at the end of the shift, then assemble them in their own time.
As someone who used to be a Pirate Party supporter, piracy has to exist in an equilibrium to avoid killing the host, and I don't know if that's possible on today's internet. Both "absurdly onerous DRM making the game unplayable, especially once abandoned" and "Rockstar spends $265m making the game, one person buys a copy, and everyone else pirates it" are bad outcomes. The optimal one is probably somewhere in the "a small number of people who Know A Guy pirate the game, gradually increasing over time" range. But that may not be sustainable either.
> Teachers and doctors are blinded by trans ideology and its flag
You're going to get a bunch of downvotes, but I'm also going to take the time to personally tell you how stupid this is as well.
It's novel if you never played with img2img, including especially several forms of (text+img)2img. Or, if you never tried editing images by text prompt in recent multimodal LLMs.
That said, I spent plenty of time doing both, and yet it would probably take me a while to arrive at this approach. For some reason, the "draw a sketch, have a model flesh it out" approach got bucketed with Stable Diffusion in my mind, and multimodal LLMs with "take detailed content, make targeted edits to it". So I'm glad the OP posted it.
> Hardware is cheap ; human labor is not.
Especially true when you're paying for neither hardware nor labor.
Writing inefficient client-side software, whether it's desktop or webshit, makes the customers / users pay for the hardware, and pay with their time.
>The mythical, it's text, so it's accessible. There is a persistent misconception among sighted developers: if an application runs in a terminal, it is inherently accessible.
Nope, nobody believes that. Devs say that for text documents which is somethig else entirely -- and, with provisions, for terminal single command apps (like grep, cut, ls, and so on). Nobody said it for TUIs.
>People keep throwing this phrase around in relation to LLMs, when not a single “fundamental limitation” has been rigorously demonstrated to exist
Some limitations are not rigorously demonstrated to be fundamental, but continuously present from the first early LLMs yes. Shouldn't the burden of proof be on those who say it can be done?
And some limitations are fundamental, and have been rigorously demonstrated, e.g.:
Funny analogy, in that when the high caliber shells start raining, most forms of cover won't make a difference. The ones that will, are not something you want to stay behind on days when you're not being actively bombed. In fact, keeping you behind such protections is by itself a military tactic - it lets the enemy roam freely and maneuver around you.
But the basic flaw of this analogy is that it implies you're at war, and your system is always in battle.
Yes, and yes. Yet most of the world's cheap plastic stuff is made that way. Here's the hobbyist version.[1]
The power of money.
I spent some time on legged locomotion back in the 1990s. It was clear then that you wanted torque control, and I did some work on the theory for that, trying to solve it from first principles, not machine learning. Got some nice theory and a patent out. But the parts just weren't there to build such things. As the article points out, the key to this is motor back-drivability. The final drive has to survive shock loads, and it has to dump forces into the motor, where the magnetic fields can take it. As I've quoted before, "you cannot strip the teeth of a magnetic field", a comment from early General Electric locomotive sales. (Locomotives are Diesel-electric, not Diesel with a clutch and shifting gearbox, because the clutch required is huge. Yes, it's been tried.) That's something few areas of engineering cared about, with the exception of aircraft flight control systems with mechanical backup.
Pneumatic actuators looked promising, but proportional dynamic valves were big, heavy, and about $1000 each. Linear motors (not ball screws) looked like the coming thing back then, as 10:1 power/weight ratio had been achieved. But that technology never got much further, and Aura, the biggest player, collapsed in a financial scandal. Series elastic actuators were (and still are) a race between the spring compressing and the ball screw motor starting up. Hydraulics were too clunky; Boston Dynamics built a 400 pound mule, but the Diesel power pack never worked. Direct drive pancake motors were used by some SCARA industrial robots, but those were too big for leg joints. I thought someone would crack the direct drive problem eventually, but nobody ever did. We're still stuck with some gear reduction.
Some of the exotic ideas for muscles mentioned in this article go back that far. The McKinney muscle is old, and not too useful. There was some interest in electrorheological fluids, fluids whose mechanical properties change when an electric field is applied. That didn't become useful either. Shape-memory alloys were a dead end; liquid cooling can overcome the slowness problem, but not the inefficiency problem. Everybody went back to good old electric motors, although they became 3-phase AC instead of DC. It helped that the drone industry made 3-phase motors and their controllers small, cheap, and powerful.
Academic robotics groups were tiny. MIT and Stanford had less than a dozen people each. Progress required hundreds of millions of dollars for all that custom engineering and R&D. The level of effort just wasn't there. Nor would throwing money at the problem prior to machine learning have led to useful products.
It's impressive what's been accomplished in the last five years. It took a lot of money.
K&R C, C89, C90, C11, C17, C23, C2y.
Not counting compiler specific extensions from GCC, clang, Microsoft, Intel, NVidia, AMD, IBM, Oracle, Apple, Green Hills, TI, Microbit, Mikroe, and many more C compiler vendors that could have been used to compile a specific project during the last 50 years.
This is a wild story about creating a business that buys and sells not using electricity. I jokingly suggested you could build an 'energy consumption facility' which was just a big resistor connected to ground (which is all an unprofitable bitcoin mining rig is) and then get paid for not using it.
The original source for this was Matt Levine over at Bloomberg. His take is also quite good: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/newsletters/2026-04-30/sel...
I feel like you're living in a different universe then. I will literally never fly Spirit (well, neither will anyone else) nor Frontier ever, I loath the experiences I've had on them so much.
First, as someone with relatively long thighs, I literally don't fit in their sardine can seats. But more relevant to most people, while things may be OK if everything goes perfectly and nothing is delayed or cancelled, you are completely SOL with Spirit/Frontier if something goes wrong (and "something" may just be they themselves decide to cancel an undersold flight at the last minute). It's nearly impossible to get someone to talk to, I feel like the employees know how shitty their companies are so they all have an attitude like they DGAF, and it's a mad (expensive) scramble to find alternative arrangements at the last minute.
I've never had as abysmal experiences as I've had on Frontier compared to any other airline.
The Model Y is neck-and-neck with the Toyota RAV4 as the most widely sold car model in the world.
Neglect is a bigger killer than active denial. If the Internet goes down it will likely be because a few execs decided to replace competent network admins with AI, or because all the competent network admins decided to quiet-quit because they aren't being paid jack compared to the folks hawking AI vaporware.
Nice.
Tesla claims they will "ramp up" production to 50,000 units per year. When does the 100th unit roll off the line? Let's see some actuals. Tesla's volume and delivery time estimates do not have a good history of reliability. Volvo has 5,000 electric semitrucks on the road right now.
Tesla also announced that MDB Drayage is using Tesla tractors to haul container chassis around the Port of Los Angeles.[1] But the pictures show a Tesla tractor hauling an ordinary box semitrailer, not a container on a container chassis. The MDB Drayage is just a three-week test, too. Drayage is almost the ideal use.
[1] https://electrek.co/2026/04/29/tesla-semi-drayage-operator-m...
> google cloud has an itar-compatible gemini pro and google drive / docs - so, people do talk to it
A lot of aerospace engineering is touch and feel. Someone has a "sense" for when to do the next step, and how to finagle the part so it comes out a particular way. They can train someone, if they apply themselves intently. But they probably couldn't explain it in words if they tried.
> They basically should have turned into regulated utilities long ago
They used to be. Read up on "Civil Aeronautics Board".
> The question is always whose surprise.
I think that the surprise of more data than expected is more desirable than the surprise of data loss. So in this case, it seems like the safe choice.
> Because the amount anyone would actually pay is substantially below cost for most routes
This is absolutely not true. If all the airlines were prohibited from making money with anything else (miles, credit cards) then airfares would rise across the board and there would still be plenty of demand. Not as much, but still plenty.
But do you have to look at the display to tell what the buttons and knobs are doing.
If you have, say, a HVAC fan speed knob with mechanical stops at the low and high end, and a detent, you never have to look at it. If you have an increase/decrease switch, you may need to look at the display to find out what you're doing. In a car, this means head-down time, eyes off the road.
I have a Black and Decker branded humidifier, which comes from "W Appliance Ltd", a licensee of the Black and Decker name. It's an ultrasonic humidifier with a 1.45 gallon tank and a big filter to remove dissolved solids, so it runs well on tap water. It's an effective humidifier.
This device is an example of how to botch the user interface for a very simple device. There's a big round display, about 12cm across. This has various dedicated icons and a central number display. Around it is a ring which displays a moving bar pattern when the device is running.
From left to right, we have five buttons. They're just touchable areas on the case, not actual pushable controls. The first button is On/Off, and, inevitably today, the same button does both functions. The display lights up when on.
The second button turns on a negative ion generator. This isn't an advertised feature, and it may not actually do anything. If this feature is on, a tiny icon illuminates on the display. This thing is down on the floor and you can't see the smaller icons without getting down on your knees. If you hold this button down for two seconds, the decorative bar pattern on the display is toned down, but not fully turned off.
The third button is fan speed. Available values are 1 to 3. Default is 2. 1 is useless, and 2 is mostly useless, because the water condenses on top of the unit rather than humidifying the room.
The fourth button sets the humidity. Values from 45% to 90% can be cycled through. There's one two-digit display, and it shows the humidity being set when the button has been pushed recently. Otherwise it shows the humidity being measured.
The fifth button sets a timer to turn the thing off after some number of hours.
When the water tank is empty, a tiny icon illuminates. The main display does not change or go dark. The one actionable piece of info the device can give the user is barely visible.
Removing the water tank or turning the device off resets all settings to the defaults. So after each refill, the user must go through setup again.
There's an optional remote available, with the same five buttons.
All this thing needed was one big knob for setting the humidity, with an off position. Plus a nice big indicator light to indicate an empty tank. Instead, they designed a complex user interface that makes it worse.
This kind of mistake appears when UI people design button systems.
I’ve never seen that work. There is a fundamental tension between those groups. Hence, member-owned co-ops and employee-owned co-ops.
LLM reimplementations for parallel versions are going to be fun to maintain, eepecially when AI market maturity ends the era of AI firms subsidizing coding tools as part of their marketshare competition efforts.
Idealism may be a “philosophically valid position”, whatever that means, but physicalism is the only framework which supports any means of resolving questions of what exists and what properties things that exist have; empirical science and the technology dependent on it works to the extent that physicalism is, if not necessarily correct, at least a useful framework for predicting future experiences. Idealism has no similar utility, however “philosophically valid” it might be.
Strong disagree. First, like many of the other comments mention, Banksy is known for being clever and witty, but not particularly subtle.
But more to the point, while you may think the meaning is a bit obvious, the fact that the flag is unadorned (which/whose flag is it?), and the man is unknown, makes me think this statue could be the ultimate Rorschach test. I'm sure there are tons of people thinking "Ha ha, this is the perfect commentary on all those idiot <people on the other side who I disagree with> wrapping themselves up in their ideology of <patriotism/social justice/cause du jour> as they march <some particular country/society/the world at large off a cliff>".
In other words, I'm guessing you probably felt the meaning was "obvious" because you filled in the blanks in the above madlibs-style statement in a way that feels obvious to you, and I think folks on "the other side" would probably fill in the blanks with the exact opposite notions in a way that feels "obvious" to them.
Aw, it's Fiberglas? Not bronze and stone?
The Wall Street Bull was a guerilla art piece too. It's a real bronze. Weighs about three metric tons. It's hugely popular, although it's been moved a few times. Banksy's work should be replicated in bronze and stone and placed permanently.
What did actually happen? I haven't played the game.
I am equal parts terrified and amazed by this. Well done, fantastic.
Everybody trying to discuss this gets the framing wrong. Obscurity isn't "bad" or "good". It's not "not" security. Security in the real-world sense is about risk. It fixes an adversary and then applies costs to them. Obscurity changes costs (usually by raising them for the adversary).
Depending on the setting and the adversary, obscurity measures can raise costs by a material or immaterial amount.
Obscurity measures usually also impose costs on defenders (and, transitively, on the intended users of the system). Those costs are different than they are for adversaries (usually: substantially lower). They might or might not be material.
Your general goal is to asymmetrically raise costs on the adversary.
Seen that way, it's usually pretty easy to reason about whether obscurity is worth pursuing or not. Don't do it if it doesn't materially raise costs for attackers, or, even if it does, if it doesn't raise costs way less for defenders and users.
What trips people up in forums like this is that we're used to dealing with security problems framed in settings where we can impose \infty costs on attackers: foreclosing all known avenues of attack (to something like a mathematical certainty, and stipulating that computer science discoveries may change the cost function tomorrow). In those settings, all obscurity measures have relatively immaterial attacker costs associated. But it's still the same underlying problem! And, in the real world, we're actually rarely operating in model situations where we really can impose \infty costs on attackers.
You seem to erroneously believe these are a little squirt gun pointed right at the oil pot.
> After all, medicine is all about knowledge, experience and intelligence (maybe "pattern recognition"), all those, we must assume that the best AI models (especially ones focusing solely in the medical field) would largely beat large majority of humans
No, I don’t see that we must.
> if we already have this assumption for software engineers
No, this doesn’t follow, and even if it did, while I am aware that the CEOs of firms who have an extraordinarily large vested personal and corporate financial interest in this being perceived to be the case have expressed this re: software engineers, I don’t think it is warranted there, either.
Xenix is the best operating system Microsoft ever shipped, but they gave up on it because there was no way they could use their PC leverage to corner the Unix market.
This works really well these days, when the average person is 13.
I think the reasoning is better thermals and signal stability. The physics of the first seem to be that there is more metal to capture and distribute heat, but the signal integrity part beats me. By having better thermals, they can increase the memory clock and, thus, bandwidth and reduce latency.
My god this took forever, legit 8 hours to write:
https://www.stavros.io/posts/adding-a-feature-to-a-closed-so...
I did write a small app to do visual writing critique loops, though, because text feedback by Claude was confusing:
Because now we have a young generation nostalgic of their parents experience in the 1980-90's, and that includes the TUI experiences we were stuck with back in the day.
(2015)
"With recent decreases in the price of natural gas..."
So, perhaps a dumb question, but the article mentions that 14 steps have been added to the base of the Angel of Independence monument, and the Wikipedia article mentions the same things:
> Originally, nine steps led to the base, but due to the sinking of the ground, an ongoing problem in Mexico City, fourteen more steps have been added.
So why didn't the monument itself also sink? Does it have piles going down to bedrock or something?
Melissa DelBello, a professor of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Cincinnati, said that while brain imaging holds promise, it is still impractical to conduct such scans broadly in clinical settings because they are too expensive and not yet precise enough at the level of the individual.
As if questionnaires and slot-machine prescription medicine treatments are accurate. I don't want to generalize for lack of statistical data, but reports of psychiatrists 'just phoning it in' while providing little actual patient engagement are widespread.
I get that the article is primarily about the satellite capabilities, but it's rather annoying it doesn't mention what the future impact of the subsidence might be.
The tide is going to turn on this in the second half of 2026. There have always been nerds who just love TUIs, and still read their email in Mutt. But I think the subtext of this article is right, that TUIs are back because of how much of a pain UI development is.
But that's changed drastically in the last few months. I spent the weekend doing SwiftUI stuff with Claude, with a lot of success. It's going to get much easier to ship fast, solid, native UIs for things, and native UI is both very fun to build and also attractive to ordinary users.
(Fun green field for doing interesting UI work: do native UI for remote server stuff, like an htop UI that uses some dialect of SSH to fetch remote data.)
I think modern TUIs are a blip. A big, important blip. But a blip. The age of the Orc is over. The time of the Human Interface Guideline has come.
My favorite scrum story: When I worked at reddit, we were still owned by Condé Nast, and we worked in the corner of the Wired magazine office. Condé Nast got a new CTO, who was completely all-in on agile. To the point that she called everyone into a conference room to read us the agile manifesto word for word.
We then went back to our little corner conference room and continued to build things in an agile way, like we had been doing for years, without all the meetings.
The poor Wired folks suffered a worser fate, and had to have all the meetings.
Redwood Materials is a major battery recycling company, probably the one mentioned.[1] They have a few moderate sized facilities using old EV batteries for grid storage, but their main business is extracting lithium from old batteries. They have a Battery Bin, placed at retail locations, where people can deposit old batteries, phones, and laptops. It has a fire suppression system.
Like steel, this industry will probably settle down to where most of the materials are recycled. Over half of steel in the US is recycled, and Nucor, which is a steel recycler, is the US's biggest steel producer. Much of what's not recycled is lost as rebar inside concrete.
Given the latest court ruling in March that AI works can't be copyrighted, this makes a lot of sense. The movie itself can't be copyrighted if it uses AI (although there is still some unresolved issues around how much AI).
>and even (gasp) sometimes smoke cigarettes are significantly healthier than Americans on every metric.
Not just "sometimes". Less these days, but when they were recognized as blue zones decades ago almost everybody smoked like chimneys.
What does an Internet communication app that have to do with a mesh radio protocol?
The younger generation also increasingly pays less attention to traditional mainstream entertainment and media, as now they can create more of it with AI.
Edit: funny to see the anti-AI crowd showing up again, how predictable... you can downvote but you can't stop the truth! Legacy entertainment is dying, and will soon become irrelevant.
Chasing very tiny fuel (or battery) efficiency gains.
Disclaiming warranty and indemnification are different things.
It’s crazy that we have stalled on the structure of the basic DRAM cell for decades now.
> they must have some technical advisors
I dare you to get half a dozen people with a technical background to call their electeds and explain why these rules are stupid. (And, if they insist on implementing age gates, as seems to be popular, the least worst ways to do it.)
Unmentioned is touchscreens frequently don't work. I often have to make repeated presses on my iphone until it registers. The same with swipes. Since there is no audible or tactile feedback, this cannot work well while keeping your eyes on the road.
Doesn't seem to affect the extent Java is used across the industry, including many workloads that in the last century companies would use C instead.
Books like Yourdon Structured Method were mainly targeted to business C back in the day.
It certainly used to be in Loki days, what happened is that there is no money in the game.
And quite possibly your vehicle will get impounded and sold at auction.
That does not seem like even close to a fair comparison and makes me wonder how valid the conclusion is. Effectively this is two times n=1, if you use 'teams' when you actually mean 'individuals' then that's not really proper reporting.
I do applaud you for having the same work done twice but it would have been far more meaningful to have two actual teams of seasoned developers do this sort of thing side-by-side. The biggest item on the checklist would be the number of undiscovered UB or UB related bugs in the C codebase and to compare that with the Rust codebase on 'defect escape rate' or some other meaningful metric.
> With Linux, you have to target specific distros, do something insane like a giant bundle of everything,
This is what you do for Flatpack, Steam, or Docker. All these are popular options.
> Oh and I almost forgot.. install scripts that detect distros, install dependencies.
Most distros offer tooling to make packages for their package managers. With them you declare the dependencies you want and the package manager does the rest.
> And god help you if you need to ship a kernel module.
The right way to do it is to open source it and let the installer compile the software against the kernel headers. Sysdig and VirtualBox do that.
You have rediscovered the job of Software Analyst, which until the early 90's was a thing. Then that all got upended and we ended up with a mix between product owners, project managers and developers / devops but I think that that ignores the fact that Analyst is a different set of skills.
> solar panel installed doesn’t disappear if China changes their stance
Most countries have days to, at most, months of imports of oil in reserve. In contrast, a panel embargo wouldn’t have disastrous effects for years. But reliance it is the same. If you’re dependent on Chinese panels, China can cap your energy growth at whim. The degradation will be slow thereafter, but present nevertheless.
Using foreign panels for anything other than bootstrapping domestic or allied production would be the EU repeating its follies first with Russia and then with American LNG.
What about https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth ?
I had a look at the issues. I see comments added to each one of them. Some of them are already on the roadmap.
I think “cases where AI lets you escape an old tarpit” are interesting even if they are likely to remain tarpits.
> when you have only 32 GB for a 16 core/32 thread CPU, you must reduce the number of concurrent compilations
Also, depending on the architecture, avoiding odd(or even) virtual cores might free more L2 or L3 for the worker threads and speed up the process.
>Most of the stock market valuation is big-tech
Which is why most of it is a bubble
Why do you think it's definitely not?
I appreciate Rust for making affine types mainstream, and having at least the C++ community start caring about security, even if half hearted.
However I share your conclusion, outside scenarios where having automated resource management as the main approach is either technically impossible, or a waste of time trying to change pervasive culture, I don't see much need for Rust.
In fact those that write comments about wanting a Rust but without borrow checker, the answer already exists.
That makes no sense, though, and reeks of extrapolating a trend way beyond the conditions in which it is valid.
The simple truth is, cloud models are always going to be strictly superior to open ones, simply because cloud model vendors can run those same open models too. And they still retain economies of scale and efficiency that operating large data centers full of specialized hardware, so at the very least they can always offer open models at price per token that's much less than anyone else's electricity bill for compute. But on top of that, they still have researchers working on models and everything around them; they can afford to put top engineers on keeping their harness always ahead of whatever is currently most popular on Github, etc.
“The U.S. just recently allowed adaptive headlights”
My most-surprising takeaway is that anybody regulates headlights in America. The runaway-brightness problem is real, well known and totally ignored.
I do understand your point, and the MCAS system needed improvement.
But still, dealing with runaway stabilizer trim is a basic thing every pilot needs to know. 1 crew did it, and proceeded normally and safely. Two other crews did not follow emergency procedures, and paid the ultimate price. After the first crash, Boeing sent around an Emergency Airworthiness Directive reiterating the procedure. The Egypt Air crew did not follow the procedure.
The reason the stab trim cutoff switch is prominent on the center console is because it is a very important switch.
I've also talked to 737 pilots and another who emailed me about it and confirmed that they considered those crashes as pilot error.
Nevertheless, I agree that the MCAS system was deficient.
> Substack is mid-brow.
It is? I thought Substack was just Wordpress with a paywall.
Oh, a visa scam. Title is misleading.
> it's possible for a pedestrian to be at fault
When I use a crosswalk, I wait until the cars stop before I cross. It's nuts to step into it assuming the cars will stop.
It's not an Arab country at all. Iranians are Persian, not Arab. Iran is low-key at war with most of the gulf Arab states.
The post is explicit about what they mean by sandboxing and what the tradeoffs are for the model they're discussing.
Because normies are easily persuaded by appeals to emotion.
> This isn't government setting prices. It's just government outlawing a certain form of price discrimination.
I.e. the government is regulating prices, yet another attempt going on for 4,000 years of trying and failing to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand.
> The grocery stores aren't going to raise the overall price to compensate for losing the ability to price discriminate: that would result in less profit for them.
Allow me to explain how prices are set:
Consider an appliance store. They want to sell refrigerators. What do they do? They have 3 refrigerator lines - the stripper, the midline, and the lux. The purpose of the stripper is that is what they advertise, to bring customers into the store. The purpose of the midrange is to upsell those who come for the stripper, as they think the extra features are worth it. The lux is sold to the wealthy customers who just want to buy the best. (Not having a lux is means the retailer is throwing easy money away.)
The moneymaker is the midrange.
You'll see the same thing in the grocery store. The store advertises the price of milk, which is likely at below cost (called a "loss leader"). People come to buy the milk, which is always on the back wall of the store. The customer has to pass by all kinds of things to get to the milk, and they'll buy it. The most overpriced stuff will be next to the checkout line.
Cheeses come in cheap, midrange, and lux, too.
There's been an extensive amount of research on exactly how to set up the store to maximize profits, which is necessary as grocery stores have razor thin margins.
BTW, the article is paywalled. I have no idea how a grocery store is going to adjust prices at checkout, as the prices are marked.
Except that Iran has been doing it since 2019: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Iran
I agree with the argument that there are many more than two ways to do this. When I built my AI assistant (https://stavrobot.stavros.io/), for example, I implemented an architecture that has both the ways detailed in the post. The harness runs simultaneously both inside and outside the container (I didn't want the harness to touch the system, and I didn't want LLM-generated code to touch the harness).
It's all tradeoffs, and picking the ones that work for what you want to do is what architecture is. The more informed you are about the tradeoffs, the better you can make your architecture.
It's called a Hackintosh; there's plenty of information on that.
Is that meant to be a joke? I've been on HN for over a decade. Closer to ELIZA's era than that of LLMs.
I'm curious because I'm also interested in hacking the Reminders app via its API, to add some features in a side app
>What makes you so sure any of us have an idea of what it means to be conscious?
I know we have an idea. It might not be right or accurate, but we very well have an idea.
>Human cognition also provides the experiencer the illusion of free will.
And I'm fine with it, as I also consider it an open question. We could very well have free will, the mechanistic view of the universe is too 18th century.
At least goverments are elected. Some private enterprise like SPLC could fuck people over and brand them with no accountability.
The usual ramblings that emerged when Dijkstra talked about the practice of the field in general as opposed about algorithms.
>(that and the fact that there is little else).
Is there a fuck-you option by which a large company can force escalating costs on you through small claims? Can they, for example, remove it to a federal court?
People have been bending over for policies and changes with way more impact to their everyday lives and livelihoods, and they'll rise up for this? That's daydreaming.
In which case the market is working as intended.
640k … there is something poetic about that number.
Private actors working hard to censor political adversaries is not necessarily illegal, for what it's worth. You could say it's problematic for other reasons, and if you mesh in with campaign financing you start to face (long shot) bank-shot legal arguments, but generally partisanship is a time-honored American tradition.
They would probably start to consider installing automatic doors if enough people do it.
> Ever since Mitchell Hashimoto mentioned the harness in February
What. The idea is as old as anyone can remember, and wrt. LLMs, it was known to be important since at least as early as ChatGPT being first released.
My BYD has a 15" screen, it's very very nice for watching films/shows while waiting/charging/whatever. I even play Expedition 33 (and other games) on it with an Xbox controller via Moonlight.
I went to public high school in Cupertino decades ago and still have friends and family there. Tesselations was a well-known ego trip of a shitshow from the start.
The parent body was dominated by those more concerned with networking prospects than their kids’ education. (Lots of cocktail parties while the kids were on iPads in a separate room.)
The tragedy is despite that person dominating the parent body, they aren’t it exclusively. Well-meaning parents get sucked in. Their kids then pay the consequences. (Probably get a solid book of stories, though.)
> That’s just a US quirk
My understanding is it’s because of car culture. Drunk-driving deaths drove up the drinking age [1].
[1] https://www.britannica.com/topic/Why-Is-the-US-Drinking-Age-...
I feel the pain, and if I get unemployed now on my 50's, most likely I will do something else outside computing.
Everyone that praises how they get more productive always forgets that means big corp now needs less of us.
I work on enterprise consulting, and have watched how the change into managed cloud infrastructure, followed by low-code/no-code tooling, has had an impact on team sizes, meaning less devs for the same outcome.
AI driven development is reducing those team sizes even further.
In many European countries, gettting jobs at a later age is really an almost impossible task, the easiest solutions end up trying to get early retirement status, or go self employed, which also isn't without its own set of complications.