brianstrimp

> I imagine that there are various triggers of early mathematical derailment

I have come to believe that the main trigger by far is the attitude of society. Of parents, family, friends, tv stars, heck even many (non math) teachers. "I wasn't good at math haha" is such a standard phrase to hear, and parents telling their kids that they don't need to worry if they "don't get it" as if it's some mystical topic that only a few gifted can unlock. Plus the uncool stigma attached to "math nerds", folks who simply have an open mind to try to "get it", turns out that it isn't actually that hard. At least when talking high school math or some basic college classes.

Not for scalar, but certainly for vector multiplication which a large part of the audience certainly needs a lot.

They are at a place in their career where it still feels relevant to mention that title.

And how much can you trust those replies?

Yeah, the submission heading should indicate that there is a high risk for a sales pitch in there.

Have you noticed any difference in picking up the language(s) yourself? As in, do you think you'd be more fluent in it by now without all the help? Or perhaps less? Genuine question.

"as a staff engineer"

Such an unnecessary flex.

Extra bonus for just putting it out there with a Github link.

Instead of landing page, login, "just $4/month or $20/year" with a "Show HN" and everybody patting them on the back for a "successful launch".

Sure, a computer nerd dad could have somehow surveilled me dialling into some BBS with my 28.8 kbps modem, but the number of people in the world that actually did this to their kids can probably be counted on one hand, and they were all psychos.

MITM-ing https google searches with a custom root cert today, man, you don't want to leave your kids any privacy? Do you also have hidden cameras in their bedroom? That's roughly on the same level.

> So, for example, I could view what they googled and when, if I wanted to anyway.

How old are your kids and do they know you are doing this? There surely is a difference between a 5- and a 15-year old. But if they are not at all aware they are constantly being watched like that, man that's some serious breach of trust. This full-on surveillance could damage your kids for life.

I'm so glad this kind of tech hardly existed when I was a kid 30 years ago.

Good interviews are a conversation, a dialog to uncover how the person thinks, how they listen, how they approach problems and discuss. Also a bit detail knowledge, but that's only a minor component in the end. Any interview where AI in its current form helps is not good anyway. Keep in mind that in our industry, the interview goes both ways. If the candidate thinks your process is bad then they are less inclined to join your company because they know that their coworkers will have been chosen by a subpar process.

That said, I'm waiting for an "interview assistant" product. It listens in to the conversation and silently provides concise extra information about the mentioned subjects that can be quickly glanced at without having to enter anything. Or does this already exist?

Such a product could be useful for coding to. Like watching me over the shoulder and seeing aha, you are working with so-and-so library, let me show you some key parts of the API in this window, or you are trying to do this-and-that, let me give you some hints. Not as intrusive as current assistants that try to write code for you, just some proactive lookup without having to actively seek out information. Anybody knows a product for that?

What does deepseek have to do with a comparison between o1-mini and o3-mini?

And the consequence is that people get banged on the head if they either use sth existing (cause they will be using it wrong) or they build sth on their own (because that's obviously bad) or they get fed up and don't use anything.

The issue with security researchers, as much as I admire them, is that their main focus is on breaking things and then berating people for having done it wrong. Great, but what should they have done instead? Decided which of the 10 existing solutions is the correct one, with 9 being obvious crap if you ask any security researcher? How should the user know? And typically none of the existing solutions matched the use case exactly. Now what?

It's so easy to criticize people left and right. Often justifiably so. But people need to get their shit done and then move on. Isn't that understandable as well?

That's the unix philosophy of using one tool for one thing, that does it well. The advantage is that it really opens a marketplace which means you are not tied to one solution if that solution turns out to suck. An alternative will quickly pop up, you switch, everybody does that, and in no time the bad piece has been worked around and replaced. This works against the "batteries included" philosophy but avoids being stuck for a long time with sub-par components.

Over time, when things stabilize, that approach can change. But nvim is still very much a moving target.

Python tries a middle ground. An http server is included, sime crypto libs are as well, but if you need something specialized you can still install alternative modules. That model seems to work well.

I'm a little puzzled by your response.

1. The message was net-upvoted. Whether there are downvotes in there I can't tell, but the final karma is positive. A similarly spirited message of mine in the same thread was quite well receive as well.

2. I can't see how my message would come across as a jerk? I wrote 2 simple sentences, not using any offensive language, stating a mere fact of statistics. Is that being jerk? And a long-winded berating of a new member of the community isn't?

3. A coin flip is 50%. Anything else is not, once you have a certain sample size. So, this was not. That was my statement. I don't know why you are building a strawman of 5 coin flips. 56% vs 44% is a margin of 12%, as I stated, and with a huge sample size, which they had, that's massive in a space where the returns are deep in "diminishing" territory.

A 12% margin is literally the opposite of a coin flip. Unless you have a really bad coin.

That makes the result stronger though. Even though many people click randomly, there is still a 12% margin between both groups. Not the world, but still quite a lot.

The article was for normal folks, not for techies for whom this obviously was a joke. My mom would totally believe that the traffic goes via Carribea.

Right, why would anybody ever legitimately want to access that portal from outside switzerland? /s

Geofencing is a typical techie "solution" that solves nothing and only brings headache to people.

> There is not much time left: taxpayers will be able to complete their tax return for 2024 online as early as next week - probably with a slight detour via the Caribbean.

A "detour"? It's just a lookup in a database to resolve a name to an IP address. Unlikely that any person or any piece of technology in the Bahamas has anything to do with a Swiss person going to that website.

Maybe the article should have clarified that a little better. Now people will actually worry about their data, while none of it will even leave the country, if the server is domestic.

I work in a field with lots of cheap microchips. I can tell you that the amount of counterfeit copies flooding in from China as well as the speed in which they are copying is truly breathtaking.

> We passed peak original content years ago.

In relative terms, that's obviously and most definitely true.

In absolute terms, that's obviously and most definitely false.

Point is that not all lines are equal. The 30% that the tool didn't make are the hard stuff. Not just in line count. Once an approach or an architecture or a design are clear then implementing is merely manual labor. Progress is not linear.

You shouldn't judge your sw eng employees by lines of code either. Those that think the hard stuff often don't have that many lines of code checked in. But it's those people that are the key to your success.

> It's definitely possible for AI to do a large fraction of your coding, and for it to contribute significantly to "improving itself". As an example, aider currently writes about 70% of the new code in each of its releases.

That number itself is not saying much.

Let's say I have an academic article written in Word (yeah, I hear some fields do it like that). I get feedback, change 5 sentences, save the file. Then 20k of the new file differ from the old file. But the change I did was only 30 words, so maybe 200 bytes. Does that mean that Word wrote 99% of that update? Hardly.

Or in C: I write a few functions in which my old-school IDE did the indentation and automatic insertion of closing curly braces. Would I say that the IDE wrote part of the code?

Of course the AI supplied code is more than my two examples, but claiming that some tool wrote 70% "of the code" suggests a linear utility of the code which is just not representing reality very well.

The exact same discussions were going on with "western" models. Don't remember the images of black nazis making the rounds because inclusion? Same thing. This HN tread is the first time I'm hearing about this anti-DeepSeek sentiment, so arguably it's on a lower level actually.

So let's not get too worked up, shall we?

Don't worry, the way things are going, you'll have that in the US as well soon.

Ironically supported by the folks who argue that having an assault rifle at home is an important right to prevent the government from misusing its power.

Only meaningful if code+data deterministically reproduce the weights.

At that point, the weights are just the cached output. Which has value since it's costly to produce from code+data.

> Pretending you're neutral while you're dealing with all sides

That's the very definition of it though.