davidmurdoch

Watch the video

Perhaps. Though Windows has been the majority share even when stack overflow was at it's peak, and before.

Source?

Who is "us" in this case? Majority of devs that took the stack overflow survey use Windows:

https://survey.stackoverflow.co/2025/technology/#1-computer-...

From what LDL-C or AboB level to what?

Oatmeal is extra special because of it has high amounts of beta glucan, a soluble fiber.

What is this supposed to do? OpenAI is already cozied up and in bed with Dept of War, they're already busy making lots of little surveillance babies.

Every country is going to arm themselves with AI.

> Both of these bodies are currently controlled by Trump's party

Is it not the other way around? The party controls Trump?

I bought breadboard.ai like 11ish years ago and ended up giving up on in the venture (AI voice assistant hardware built into a house via standard US 120V outlets and light switches, basically Jarvis). Anyway, the logo is begging to be a lowercase b, like this:

•

•

••

••

But the dots are small rectangles, like on a breadboard.

If only humans scaled like that

> LLMs finally kill them off for good

Juniors?

Good call. Maybe the US needs a food score system on the label like they have in some European countries. Obviously that system has it's flaws though

What other instances of "we did our job as little too well" are there?

I can think of tabacco and other drugs, but that's not really the same. Monopolistic behavior doesn't really fit either. Maybe Kleenex marketing doing so well their name became interchangeable with the word "tissue"?

5.2 was already very good with svelte 5, at least when you have the svelte MCP server set up.

I've been using 5.2 the way they're describing the new use case for 5.3 this whole time.

For me, yes. It is possible as when working full-stack if you aren't being interrupted. Not all tasks, but some tasks, where you're pretty sure of the high-level requirements, have the necessary agency to stay in a bubble for a bit, and the task is sufficiently complex but narrow enough so you don't have to context switch too much.

With LLM Agents I can't seem to do it, as waiting for the agent to finish working just doesn't tickle my brain in the right way. I feel... distracted, I guess?

I'm wondering if everyone here saying they think harder with LLM agents have never reached "flow state" while programming. I just can't imagine using 100% of my mental focus state for hours with an agent. Sure, I think differently when my coding is primarily via agent, but I've never been totally enveloped by my thoughts while doing so.

For those who have found a "flow state" with LLM agents, what's that like?

Yes, and? Making up a story was literally the point of my comment.

I don't even own any apple products.

I have a 2019 and it's flat.

I guess I'm just trying to suggest that teachers sometimes might think they know why things are being taught, and make claims like "you wont always have a calculator" as the reason for learning mathematics.

One conclusion might be that it'd be better for some students if teachers understood the why, as they might change their approach on some subjects. An example: knowing that certain equations and patterns EXIST, and which kinds of problems they apply to, is generally much more important that knowing the actual equations by heart themselves.

Having a deep intuition about what the calculator is doing is the skill we were actually being taught. Teachers don't know always understand why things are being taught.

Something interesting to see is a version of if this that displayed a % of total animals instead of absolutes.

Sometimes I think the 30% was supposed to be 3% originally, and no one noticed the decimal was in the wrong place when they shipped it, and then people paid it anyway, so they kept it.

30% is just so unreasonable that it would be totally understandable if someone would believe this.

Is it still true that Apple bans you from telling users, in app, they can pay through alternative platforms?

> sometimes use tiktok > use it regularly

That's not how these words work. A reasonable person wouldn't think these phrases are interchangeable when taking about something addictive -- in this case TicTok. Someone who "smokes sometimes" and someone who "smokes regularly" are very different groups. This isn't an attack; I understand you now, I'm just trying to get you to see where I was coming from.

> Like I already said I ... that I never experienced before.

You had not said that yet, you just said I said you were wrong.

> this was entirely different and coincided in time with the complaints of censorship.

If you think this statement isn't reasonably interpreted as you implying and leaning in to, or in the very least encouraging, this conspiracy theory, then I think you are being disingenuous.

I was trying to provide helpful information by giving someone who only "sometimes" uses tiktok some assurance that these changes are typical.

Thanks. Though I do admit that my swipe back at them about "touching grass" was out of line.

Because this exact conspiracy has been going on since the elections for 2020. And it's well known and documented. Are you essentially asking me why I wouldn't encouFrage a conspiracy theory based on the anecdote of someone who says they hardly use the platform they are suggesting is forcing propaganda/censorship on them?

There are polarizing events getting more coverage right now, by far, than anything else in the USA, and HN user infecto is subscribing to the idea that the algorithm isn't going to try to check if these important ongoing events interest them.

It's very unlikely that "this time might be different"; the far more likely answer is that this is run-of-the-mill algorithm exploration injection.

Infecto replied me I said "you are wrong". I didn't. My original comment was assuring, in good faith, made to let them know that TikTok changing theit FYP feed is normal. They hadn't yet mentioned they already knew about algo resets and that they were leaning in to the conspiracies. Their reply to me was not in good faith, and did not respond to the strongest possible interpretation of what I originally commented.

I said you were right. You might need to go touch grass man.

[Edit]: I shouldn't have made the "touch grass" comment. Sorry.