Echoing the other commenter, you appear to have lost it already. Nobody is interested in vibe-economics. I've been seeing your posts for a while now and just shake my head every time. No matter how much an LLM puffs you up, it does not mean your LLM-generated economic theory is actually as revolutionary as you believe it is. Step 1 to unlosing your mind is recognising the symptoms of AI psychosis and re-evaluating your relationship with a chatbot.
If you're banking on "we will lose the knowledge to put people on Mars" as the reason for going to Mars, what exactly is the purpose of putting people on Mars? In this knowledge-loss scenario, we will lose any knowledge gained from putting people on Mars, and also if there are any people still on Mars they will all die when their support systems on Earth collapse.
This is not a "new kind of logic game". This concept is called a Hamiltonian path, and such puzzles are in many video games, with my personal earliest recollection being the Sootopolis Gym puzzles in Pokemon Sapphire (2002).
According to the people trying to ruin his life. This is an accused thought crime, not something he actually did. Also, supposing it actually was something he did, your argument is that building a trillion dollar business on stolen licensed material is legally permissible but giving it away for free is worthy of your life being ruined. Wonderfully coherent world view, that is. Piracy is fine, but only if you hoard it to yourself and profit from it!
> It’s not like you will be jailed for pirating movies.
We're literally talking in a thread about someone who committed suicide because the US government was hellbent on ruining his life with a felony conviction for piracy.
C: "Information is free only for the rich and not free for everyone else, giving the rich a material advantage over everyone else that not only entrenches but accelerates wealth inequality and impedes class mobility"
You, or Swartz, are an advocate for A. Why, exactly, do you think that obliges you/Swartz to prefer C over B while A is not true?
Outstanding article. I didn't have much of an informed opinion but they certainly make a compelling case for their position. Shame to see so many comments here that clearly did not even read it. If you're going to comment on a thread like this with a complaint about LVT the author addresses, you really ought to engage with the author's rebuttal and offer a counter-rebuttal rather than just restating the level 1 argument that the author already mentioned verbatim.
They're responding to attempted guilting. "Retirees will lose all their value they worked their whole life for" is the guilting, "actually they didn't earn shit by buying land and sitting on it" is the "not giving a damn". Your reply is literally the exact inverse of reading comprehension.
Housing should not be an investment. You should maybe be able to expect to get what you put in back out of it if you decide to sell. But you should not expect to profit 2, 3, 500% by waiting 20 or 30 years. Speaking from my personal experience, housing in Japan is extremely affordable and Japan is much, much better off for it compared to the hellscape that is US housing prices. And for what purpose? To reward people for already having wealth by passively giving them more of it?
They probably know that. I specifically mentioned actual compilation time as another one of the things that's great about Zig, so it is relevant to mention. Certainly the language sounds nice from what I'm hearing. These days most languages are deeply neglecting compilation time as a feature (interpreted languages aside), so Zig is a breath of fresh air for me in that regard.
Comptime? Vastly superior toolchain? Trivial C interop? Sub-second incremental compilation in large projects? I'm not familiar with Object Pascal at all, so do correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd really be surprised if it has much of Zig's standout features.
At the level of customer service they provide (ie ~none), Google Play would be "sustainable" at a 1% cut. Everything above that is pure profit. Which is exactly why they're doing everything they can to lock people into Google Play and lock people out of distributing/accessing apps outside of it. This isn't some kind service Google is providing at cost out of the goodness of their hearts, it's their attempt to corner the market and extract a massive amount of economic value without doing any meaningful work.
> the model of an OS running various off-the-shelf apps for various tasks will soon become obsolete
"ChatGPT, please send <username> a message with the following contents: <content>. Oh, what platform? Create the platform to send the message for me. That username doesn't mean anything on this brand new platform? Uhhhh" [insert step where the AI-psychotic decides to give up on communicating with humans and tells ChatGPT to roleplay as the person they intended to message, I guess]
Wow, that second link does exactly what I do when I'm talking to people about skittle highlighting; demonstrating a skittle highlighted snippet of prose to show how absolutely harmful it is. I only started doing that maybe three years ago, so they've got me beat by 15 years or so! Glad I'm not alone on this crusade, at least. It is genuinely my belief that skittles have cost humankind millions of manhours of productivity, at minimum.
Nobody here is saying otherwise. The Codeberg policy in question does not forbid LLM-assistance outright; their policy is targeted towards unmitigated slop. Even myself, as I argue heatedly against the religious adherents, not only use LLMs daily but work for a very successful LLM startup developing and selling LLMs-as-tools. That does not make the zealots who won't shut the fuck up about LLMs-as-gods any less infuriating.
Dogshit code doesn't give customers value from the product. You can get away with enshittifying your code/product if you already have an iron grip on the market and network effects make it impossible to escape, eg. Windows/appleOS/Android, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Discord, etc. At that point, you're relying on the inertia of community lock-in to replace product quality. However, this strategy does not work if you aren't a FAANG-scale monopolist. If your code and product is dogshit, you will never get off the ground. You need not only a better product but an overwhelmingly superior product to the competition to defeat inertia. And we see this playing out in reality: there are no vibecoded software disrupting the market. At most vibecoded software is carving out a new MLM-style pyramid of vibecoding tools, but it is not replacing hand-crafted software.
Sure. You can come gloat about how you're unemployed because nobody needs a prompt monkey when they can just prompt the LLM to produce dogshit code themselves.
Policies are enacted for current reality, not fantasy futures. If your magical fantasy becomes reality (it won't), they can just... change their policy. Of course, you aren't thinking about practical effects of policies on platforms, only on how it's an insult to your LLM-bro way of life.
Sure, to some extent. What I really took issue with is saying "I couldn't have caught this", which is a sort of learned helplessness. It's very often the case that, independent of inscrutable platform differences, LLMs just produce extremely shoddy code that obviously does not scale, and there is a whole class of problems you can solve before they become problems if you actually know how to program.
My intent was not to be harsh, though. I was trying to make a point that one can learn and do better. Coding is very much not solved.
> I’m not meaning to say “it works on my machine” by this, but simply that I couldn’t have caught this before.
If you knew what you were doing you could have reasoned about what your code did, though. Such is the danger of trial-by-error vibe coding. I personally closed the tab because the audio kept cutting off arbitrarily after some minutes. Not to criticise you unduly because this was a cute concept, but I hope you might take away that LLMs are not only not perfect, but are also only "good enough" if your standards for "good enough" are particularly low, and use this as motivation to learn more in the future instead of always relying on them.
I think no interaction is good for an offline pond, but I do think some tiny little bit of interaction would be nice online since it adds a touch of humanity, being able to see other people and interact with them in some small way.
It appeared to be real earlier, or at least simulated being real. I watched for 10 minutes and there were ~10 koi in my pool, with koi routinely flickering in and out of existence as though they suddenly joined or left. That said, I see three static koi now. Entirely conceivably that HN killed the backend and triggered a failsafe.
Paying staff to avoid distributing literal malware on your platform is not a bad business decision. And even if it was - yes, bad business decisions are within the scope of fiduciary duty. Have you ever seen someone successfully sued under this clause for making a bad business decision, in your life? Fiduciary duty is more like, you can't take the money and run or pay your nephew a $10,000,000 salary to play ping pong in the office. As long as you're not doing something clearly, intentionally harmful to the business and investors, you're clear.
Not convinced this is an authentic human story rather than LLM-generated marketing blogspam, but if it is real, it's rather sad. All this mention of discovering CLI tools, tools, tools, configuration, configuration, configuration, AI, AI, AI. Not one mention of programming. You know you can program your computer to do what you want it to do? You don't have to scour "Github Trending like a madman, looking for the next thing that would make [you] more productive". You can just write the code that will make you more productive.
Perhaps you could use your wonderfully amazing imagination to imagine the contents of your fridge as you last saw it when you opened it 8~12 hours ago to retrieve food or drink.
Do people have the memory of a goldfish or what? "I can't remember what's in my fridge" is not a problem I've ever had in my entire life. What is there even to automate? If you were talking about a smart fridge with an accompanying robot that automatically orders groceries, picked up the deliveries itself, and stocked your fridge that'd be something, at least... still an insanely, unbelievably wasteful use of both your personal and our planet's resources to save five minutes a week, but something. But that's not even what smart fridges promise. They promise to automate looking in the fridge, an activity that you must do every time you withdraw or deposit food from/into it anyways. Wonderful.
GTFO, Russian propagandist. If Russia dislikes the state of affairs there's a reallyyy easy solution: don't invade other countries baselessly. "NATO's proxy war" is a really funny way to describe the Russian war of aggression.
I see. I was not aware of this system preference. Perhaps I would be if Apple didn't intentionally wall people out of developing for it unless they participated fully in the ecosystem by purchasing OS-locked hardware that they intentionally deter emulation of while requiring paying them for the privilege to develop for them. I won't ever see eye-to-eye with users who voluntarily opt into that environment, so if the scrollbar behaving slightly differently than expected but still reasonably well is truly a dealbreaker for somebody who stumbled onto my webapps, oh well!