a1371

This is a great example of how to do the marketing correctly.

A suggestion: explain the privacy implications front and center. What do you plan to do with the voices etc.

I absolutely love that they look a lot like food labels. It's a consumer friendly choice and is instantly recognizable.

Prompt engineering doesn't feel like an activity that creates sustainable AI advancement. A prompt may work well with one model, in most situations, but even the best practices seem too experimental.

For their competition to avoid a PR disaster, isn't it better to look in the model? Perhaps observe the weights, when the AI says something that you want to avoid in the future. A safeguard could trigger if the model is going in that direction.

Highly opinionated article void of facts. Reaching the conclusion that the government should install solar, not seeing the fallacy in that argument. Governments are also optimization machines that connects the opinion of voters and interest groups, to action. What they spend on is not based on objective good, it's based on what the public opinion is that year. Most people would rather money going into low income housing and fighting homelessness. So the system will end up underfunded and that's assuming if the gov is efficient. I say that as a socialist, if the market is bad, regulate it.

I played the VC game. We were attending every opportunity to give 10% of our business for $200K. No one would bite. Gradually, it felt it was easier to land customers than VCs. Then there came a moment that I wish for every founder. Our revenues started not only paying the bills, but also fueling growth. It felt as if a veil was lifted from my eyes. Now, it feels like all those pitches were a waste of time.

What I don't like about this reporting is that someone out there is doing something modestly novel and the article has a ridicule undertone about it. So many good things don't happen in corporations or the government because the managers fear this kind of response.

Cold fusion vibes?

Since the last video I have been seriously thinking about making these powders as a hobby. The problem is that I want to mix them with some paint or resin to get a more permanent application. I know this needs some research but any ideas about where to start?

We really do and we try to reflect that in the offer. Our vesting packages are orders of magnitude larger than what's typical, with long exercise times. Our finances are also pretty stable (no VC, cash flow positive, long term licenses) so we can invest in them upfront and go over asking.

Sigh. Seldom on HN do I see terrible advice, but this is certainly one of them. Here is a summary of the article:

> Hi HN! You really like if-else statements, right? Let me frame a humane conversation like salary negotiation as a bunch of conditionals so that it is within your comfort zone. If they say X, then repeat after me: "..."

Then HN follows the advice and comes back and complains about being stuck in a soulless job that they just learned to "remove their feelings from it". Just look at these comments as a tiny example.

About me: I have the final say in all of our hirings at a stable startup that many people have told me would be their dream job.

I will not hire a person who follows this process. Sure, against a recruiter you may be able to negotiate to push the number up. That's because they are looking for their bonus and only care if you finish your probation. Against me, you are trading off your image, because I try to see your role 2 to 5 years down the road. That's when a position truly pays off for us.

Basically, I am trying to understand if I can make you happy now, and keep you happy in the coming years. For that, you have to help me see you as a person WHO KNOWS WHAT YOU WANT.

Now, let's follow this article's advice on salary negotiation, and see where that lands us:

1. I ask you for your salary expectation. 2. You return the question back to me. (“Yeah, I have some thoughts around it but I was actually wondering what the salary range for the position is?”) 3. I either answer you or re-return the question back to you. 4. You give me the answer to question #1 anyways.

You are not negotiating. You are running a subroutine. You are also telling me that you are not an open nor a direct person. There is no "money on the table" that you can get from me by just asking the right order of questions. I want to know what satisfies you based on your lifestyle, what you heard from your friends, and what you saw online. I don't want to play mind tricks or be played. In the era of ChatGPT, I have seen it all. You hiding behind intricate words does no favor.

Same goes with what the article suggesting about leverage. In our previous posting, we got 500+ applicants. If I give you an offer, it is not for bargaining. I think I am a fair person and I try my best to meet your need. If you come back to me and ask for more because Adobe is offering you something interesting, I realize you don't really care about us vs Adobe, you are going for the best bid. Again, I want you to think about that 2-5 year timeframe, would I be in the right mind to count on you? Probably not. So I suggest that you take Adobe's offer and we move on to a candidate that we feel sees something special in us.

That being said, I get why people may try these tactics. people are worried that they are giving too low of a number and if they had said something higher, it would have been fine anyways. Well, you can ask me how do I ensure that people get their fair share and what policies we have to keep salaries competitive through promotion.

Trust me, it will be clear.

I don't really get this. The paradigm has always been there, it has been the technology limitations that have defined the UI so far. Having robots and computers that humans talk to has been a fixture of sci-fi movies. Perhaps the most notable example being 2001: A Space Odyssey which came out 55 years ago.

I have noticed this too and I feel it's because of the higher acceleration. It may give the drivers the feeling that they can insert themselves in even closer encounters because the car is more responsive.

I'm just saying this is the embodiment of value-based pricing. Like it or not, that's what has made the silicon valley.

The title doesn't do it justice. These tactics are pretty dishonest I must admit:

> Making its "Delivery Fee" seem related to distance or demand, even though none of it goes to the delivery person.

I could see they justify this as value-based pricing. As in, it would have costed more for you to travel farther to get the food from that particular restaurant if you were to order pickup. The thing I find dishonest is labeling this the "delivery fee". I always thought that the money goes at this partially to the deliverer.

> Offering an "Express" option that implies faster delivery, but then changing the wording to "Priority" in billing so it is not held to delivery times.

> Charging an "Expanded Range Delivery" fee that seems based on distance but is really based on a restaurant's subscription level and demand.

So things that bring no value to the user. The question is, if people know this will they vote with their dollars and move their business elsewhere?

> Adding an undisclosed 99 cent "marketing fee," paid by the customer rather than the restaurant, to promote menu items that customers add to their carts.

This one wins the cake. So each user is forced to pay a dollar to promote the items they have ordered from that menu. Let's call this preach-flation?

The price of their all access is 2x other spaces. Their pay as you go makes sense for our volume of use and what I tell you has been our experience.

Due to life events, I started looking for a new office for our team last week. I had always considered WeWork to be too hip for my taste. So when a colleague suggested it, I thought they were joking.

But they weren't and it actually wasn't a bad idea. Good location, nice interior, "flexible" plans.

What I found thought is that buying these flexible plans is very clunky. For example, I wanted to try things out at first by getting hot desks for 5 people for a day. Installed their app and realized that I can book for only myself. Their support said that every employee must download the app and purchase their own hot desk.

This is extremely stupid! I am not going to ask the team to pay for their office and then reimburse them. The best solution I have is to make 5 accounts on the phones that I have access to.

So here I am with a service of theirs that I want to get, but they don't care enough to sell it to me.

I really hope that takes off because you are correct. Python though has such a fluid syntax that I'm not sure TS can match. For example when you want to sum two Numpy arrays, you just need the + operator, while that sort of thing is notoriously unpredictable in JS.

I want to point everyone to the "No creating content" clause of the terms. I don't fully understand it but I think it'll substantially limit what can be done.

When you search a city it shows its location at the time. I thought it probably just takes in the coordinates but to my amusement, it actually pins the location based on the tectonic plate that the city is on. So it can't show Seattle of 470 million years ago because that tectonic plate didn't go as far back. Intriguing!

The polyfills are not complete yet as this update points out

Deno's major adoption point can be it's native typescript support but without an easy way to bring an npm package into it, developing its community will be tough. So I can totally see why they are ployfilling `node:crypto` since many cloud SDKs are using those in their packages.

I didn't at first figure out that clicking on each character shows the reference. It feels like exploring someone else's daydreams. Bravo

> The plaintiffs alleged they lost $1.7 million in the cyberattack and that the repayment plan would take thousands of years to make them whole

Creative repayment plan.

> the court focused on statements by the bZx Protocol developers that creation of a DAO would insulate the Protocol “from regulatory oversight and accountability for compliance with U.S. law

Looks like they attempted the "citizen of the earth" card.

Eeh. Misguided article. The article itself starts by recognizing the challenge of making scenarios because of the feedback loop they embody. Then seemingly forgets about all that and basically says "coal has likely peaked already, why are assuming it will grow in the future?"

Well, because of that feedback loop. Coal is still a cheap way of making energy, as it is in the business-as-usual economics of the scenarios. If we say "coal is not a problem", the pressure shifts away from coal and its usage may linger longer than it should.

The scenarios are about the forces impacting the trends, not the trends themselves.

I recall there was a battery free cellphone project on the premise of harvesting power from electro magnetic cell tower waves. They couldn't pull it off but maybe that could help this?

Then why are they banning R134A as the article says?

I don't understand why we can't have something like this:

```

.target {

  name: myname

}

.tooltip: {

  left: var(myname.left),

  bottom: calc(var(myname.top)-20px)

}

```

What's hard about exposing some element properties in var()? Instead of just making specific APIs all the time.

> Money is not everything

I don't think that's true for the VC-funded startups. I actually expect to hear that from the farmers I have known in my life. With the margins I saw, they were not in it for money. They would pride themselves in being self-sufficient, living off the land, and co-living with the nature. ABF -- Always Be Farming -- they say.

I have yet to see an actual environmental lifecycle analysis of these "disruptive" vertical farms. That amount of steel, precious metal, and plastic that goes into making a facility has high upfront Embodied Carbon. Can that really have a pay back compared to when you use the sun and the land? How many acres of land can you really replace with a farm on top of an abandoned parking lot?

What they say about vertical farms is way too rosy. They must compare their methods with borderline medieval farming techniques to calculate some 99% efficiency improvement. Farmers today care as much about biodiversity, ecology, and sustainability as anybody else, if not more.

This seems like a Savvy move from Nokia. At least in my country, Nokia phones are remembered for the following:

- nearly indestructible

- well priced

- back pops out

Nokia is doing the most sensible thing to reuse these as its differentiator.

I understand people taking about the OS. But Nokia has little control over the software and it has also never been its selling point for me with Symbian, and later Windows Phone.

I sure miss their wonky phones with weirdly arranged buttons and their random quirks.

I routinely watch videos and listen to audiobooks at 2.75x, that's somehow the magic number for me. I can only do it with the headphones (not speakers) and I only lose a negligible number of words.

I'm not planning to stop but I have noticed that after a few years of doing this, my speech has gotten faster. This is not good because I feel sometimes I don't let people process what I say and sometimes I make them feel rushed. I suppose fast listening is subconsciously training me to speak faster

Another interesting observation is that I often don't know what the theme musics of my favorite YouTube channels sound like because they sound very different at a faster speed. When I accidentally hear them at normal speed I think to myself that they actually sound a lot nicer than what I'm used to.