Karrot_Kream

A good eval benchmark suite could really improve this then.

If you write Tcl/Tk from scratch for an application and architect it well, it's great. The way it's injected into VLSI tooling is an abomination. I've done both.

This is partially because when Tcl was first incorporated in VLSI tools it didn't have a good way to organize and modularize code. But this is also because the big VLSI tool shops realize they basically have a monopoly on their integration surface and have no incentive to improve it.

It's easier to freeze the integration surface and maintain backward compatibility than it is to move the surface forward.

Yes I find this a big difference in modern weed culture and alcohol culture. At my age most of my friends know their tolerance for weed quite well and we usually keep low dosage edibles around just to offer for friends who consume weed a couple times a year.

While I don't drink that much anymore, when I do I just kinda have a murky mental binder of how strong a drink is at a given venue I've visited before but even then it's very unsophisticated.

While I do think quality of subs can be quite high (much higher than discourse here for certain topics and certain subs), this is a pretty well known problem. Discussion on this [1] from a post I made earlier.

r/sanfrancisco is quite negative on the current mayor Daniel Lurie and frequently expresses approval for Zohran Mamdani even though Lurie has an approval rate of 74% in SF [2] while Mamdani has a 69% favorability [3] in NYC largely because of the political skew of the sub.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49556546

[2]: https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/sf-mayor-lurie-...

[3]: https://sri.siena.edu/2026/09/23/siena-poll-of-likely-new-yo...

What made you want to move over? Are you just desperate for a venue to talk, desperate enough that if your venue of choice changes its API you'll go to another place with other norms?

Yeah I do think the key is personal organization.

> Outing, yes, but by-subject is alien to me.

Hah seeing other photographers' Lightroom tags is always a trip. I know folks that even organize by exposure stops since they're after a certain look.

I think bookmarks, files, and folders (to nostrademons point) is too coarse an abstraction for different organization domains. Music ks a good example. Most people want to organize by album, artist, year, genre, or song title. Files and folders or bookmark trees can mimic that structure but can't replace it. I like to order my photos by outing or by subject.

In either cases while you can reify your organizational system into files and folders it's just inferior to a personal classification system.

HN is already perceived as an argumentative forum. Now imagine if the ratio rule wasn't there. FWIW I find it just as effective on Bluesky and Twitter for myself. Ratioed threads are usually more heat than light.

I think sadly all big conversations on this site are like this these days. It didn't used to be like that sadly. Z3 and some early Lean threads used to be great.

If you're going to insinuate that the author of Bend2 doesn't understand PLs and formal verification, you should do so with some proof and not a hot take dunk.

I think it's fine to critique the language and the approach without criticizing the author and I hate that this site has become Tech Drama News, like the worst parts of Twitter.

As a silver lining, it seems like we're hitting a huge compute limit everywhere we go due to TSMC's reluctance to scale. If demand for intelligence continues to stay high, an opportunity opens up to challenge Nvidia and Nvidia run kernels/models.

Makes sense. If you have the resources, trialing out various models to find the pareto optimal point is worth it.

ChatGPT or ChatGPT Work or Codex? Are folks at your company still just using a chatbot to do work? (If so, this is quite surprising, as I find harness-based agent usage to be much much better than chatbotbot agent usage.)

I generally operate with the understanding that HN today has lots of groups, with an overall "left" lean (as much as anyone can flatten politics into a single axis.) Libertarians, leftists, liberals, nationalists, everyone is here. Appealing to one "enemy" group strikes me as a cheap blow; it's sure to increase engagement for your post with little added discourse value. IMHO at least.

I think this forum has a lot of values and don't think it's been libertarian in outlook in a long time based on what gets upvoted here so appealing to that is a bit silly but anyway I don't think this is a fruitful conversation so have a good day.

It's hard for me to read '"Regulations bad" is a pretty common platitude around here but you've stated your main thesis, here, without a hint of support to back it.' as anything more than that.

There's no strong consensus, but there's weak consensus that post-GFC regulation is a factor behind but is not causal in any way, for the decrease in IPOs. Here's a paper [1] (well it's the paper author discussing his paywalled paper lol) exploring SOX regulations and their effects on IPOs. There's other papers and I think a good survey will help you on this topic. I don't think there's consensus on regulations being the causal factor, but it is one of many.

I thought GP was modest in calling it out as simply a contributing factor. Regulation is complicated and reaching for it should be something done with care.

(Also FWIW, I think you're being a bit cheap by appealing to culture war talking points.)

[1]: https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2009/09/21/the-effect-of-sox...

There is something like this with crowdfunding called Reg CF (Regulation Crowdfunding) but it comes with many limitations. Ultimately the worry is that less wealthy people will invest their life savings in a scam and be rugpulled. Groups of accredited investors can, and definitely, do this. The problem is that these large funds have lost their scruples and it's hard to compete against a large fund that can outspend and out market a smaller one.

Yes this is something I think a lot about.

The issues raised in this article are very real but even aside from that, you end up enabling a class of zombie companies that have no pressure to succeed. Their founders raise and end up as advisors and LPs themselves eventually while employees at these companies receive equity that will never be liquid and will rarely be worth anything. At best the equity in these companies will be realized at steep discounts as the lack of liquid markets makes it very easy for private companies to claim that a company was valued at a certain amount at a certain time with scant certainty of what happens next. Companies stay unprofitable and private for decades, relying on private markets to stay solvent.

Pre-GFC plenty of undisciplined, unprofitable companies would IPO. While some did take public money then eventually go under, most just made their underwriters lose money. With pressure to trade publicly and put sunshine on company books, losers lost and winners won.

The result is a K-shaped economy. Private capital appreciates on paper and private capital holders take out loans on the inflated value of their equities. Meanwhile public markets are more discriminating and fiscally tight by necessity. A private company may eventually go under but cheap loans collateralized on private capital may be paid back before there's any financial reckoning.

I wouldn't say it's a "really good AI community". There's not really much discussion that happens on new papers, techniques, new GPU kernels, topologies, etc etc. There's a few folks whose content I enjoy that generally revolves around philosophizing around how widespread LLM-style intelligence will affect society for both good and bad which is fun to read from time-to-time but not the level of context I desire out of an AI discussion.

Unless I'm not following the right people which can totally be the case. I've stopped using the platform regularly because of how present this mob mentality toxicity is on the site.

Doesn't this ultimately boil down to: other people are spending their money on things I don't want them to? Which I mean, yeah I feel like this about tons of things all the time. I'm human too. But I know this is a petty part of me not a thoughtful part.

> Open to ideas, propose where. I have...looked extensively for work with meaning and am coming up short.

FWIW I've decided to view sites like HN and Reddit as "intellectual junk food." There's a feeling that one is engaging in intellectual betterment by using these sites, but in practice none of the outcomes valued in intellectual output fall out of reading and posting a lot on these sites. I can't tell you what you should work on; every human who wishes to be creative struggles with this problem.

Ultimately very few problems can be solved by talking endlessly about them, whether that's online or in real life. I suggest just trying to actually make solutions to problems if you want to use your time that way. Talking with others can be a great way to get energized about solving problems, but doesn't take the place of actually solving them.

FWIW I think you spend too long on this site. I'm not trying to be mean but I see you much too often here having strong opinions thinly sourced and think that perhaps your time would be better spent elsewhere. I, too, spend more time than is healthy for myself on this site but think I spend a fraction of what you do.

I realize we've both been in this community for a long time but I think one of the things I find about participating in Reddit and HN communities over time is that, I stop both being able to separate the truth of a matter from the argument itself and I stop being able to conceptualize the people in the thread as people and not mouthpieces for argument. There's a special toxicity that arises on these sites, where the argument becomes the main issue at hand and I see a conversation as a large conflict between world views. I may be projecting my own feelings here, but think it's worth contemplating these hot button issues elsewhere and responding in a lower temperature forum more conducive to actual discourse.

(I don't really respond to these kind of threads, but I'll respond to you because I respect you and am a Zerotier customer and have been for years. Thanks for your work!)

> My deeper point is: there’s a lot of discontent out there for legitimate reasons, but I don’t think LARPing communism will help any more than LARPing fascism has. We need new ideas, not 19th century ones that failed. Right now it just feels like the only ideas we have is to LARP the 1930s.

I think that's genuinely why the pop left and the pop right are LARPing the 1930s. The deep thinkers of the world on both sides know that there are very hard problems but nobody has thought of solutions. I think the mid-to-late 1800s felt a lot like this too, which is the crucible through which many of today's political and economic systems came from.

I keep coming back to this: why do I need to run a local model on my own GPU? Open models can run in dedicated clouds and while, yeah, they may be more expensive per token than my own GPU, when accounting for depreciation, energy usage, and opportunity cost (money not spent on my GPU will instead sit in my portfolio appreciating with its particular blend of returns), I'm pretty sure I break even or even net lose money with a GPU.

Don't get me wrong, there are advantages to a fully local model in that, I can have agents looping 24/7 even when my internet is not working. But this is niche enough that if I had to price the advantages they don't seem worth it.

If I'm willing to pay the Openrouter tax, I can fire up Openrouter today and just get access to whatever model I want, and still pay a fraction for tokens as what I'm paying with the big guys.

I have a lot of Sinosphere friends and I strongly disagree with this. Much like the US I think there is a very nuanced view of Chinese authorities, but there's plenty of overreach there as well. The zero covid policy was not that long ago. I have friends who were stuck in hotels for weeks. Relatives who were stuck in the US for months.

It's cathartic to feel that your views are correct but simply suppressed by the establishment. You don't simply have a political opinion, you are ultimately correct, and the true absolution of revolution will make your opinion manifest. My family is from a developing country so the particulars are different, but yes people don't just descend into violent revolution because they lose their jobs. Unemployment is indeed a factor in revolution but is one of many.

It's one of those unfortunate aspects of internet information silos where people repeat this phrase to each other but don't really contextualize their opinions in the greater body of history and political thought.

Additionally, I think a lot of people with this opinion don't realize the vast difference in material standards we have today and what was true in the age of Communist revolution and decolonialization. It's tempting to think of material standards as relative and I think inequality is indeed a destabilizing factor in socities, but minimum material standards are true in so much of the world today that I think a class-conscious revolution is much harder in most of the developed and developing world absent other external political forces (e.g. nationalism, decolonoialism, etc)

Ugh no. You and the sibling commenter pushed me to do some searching but it looks like that class isn't offered anymore. It was a special class anyway (which is kinda common in grad schools.) I'll see if I can dig up some lecture notes from a long time ago.

Statistical reasoning isn't really motivated when it's taught, at least in the US. My schooling (I did jump around a bunch) assumed the student to have picked it up through vague balls-and-bins style problems taught in various units in various grade levels.

By the time I took my statistics class in undergrad math, coming from a similar background to you, they just sort of assumed you had a head for combinatorics and used that to develop everything else. I was a really good student in undergrad and statistics was my hardest class, I spent like 2x time on that class than any other class.

In grad school I took a class on complex system failure analysis and was quite apprehensive. My hope was that I could team up with a classmate to help with the math while I could work on the systems levels analysis. Turns out that because I understood systems really well, system failure offered me the intuition I needed to really understand statistics. I aced the class, published a moderately popular paper in distributed systems using what I learned, then went and took our graduate level statistics class widely known to be very difficult and aced it.

I think tacking statistical thinking on as an afterthought in curriculum is a huge mistake in the school system, especially so in the age of machine learning. I think for the average student statistical thinking is even more important than a lot of trigonometry.

It's a mostly equity offer. Private capital is always more risky than publicly traded shares so probably less than $7bn risk adjusted, which makes sense for Stripe.