digitalPhonix

> The problem is structural

> The policy is asymmetric, and that's what makes it harmful.

Well I found the problem already

> Monopoly is a word that has a real meaning

Correct

> Amazon has nothing even approaching a monopoly

Sortof? It probably doesn’t have a monopoly in any segment that matters, but it does have many illegal monopolies (as defined by US FCR and the Sherman Act).

Evidence: Amazon has been found guilty of being an illegal monopoly multiple times already.

> DigitalOcean is a business

Business typically need to pay invoices for services they asked for?

So whoever industrialises before there's scientific consensus on climate change gets to keep the benefits of their pollution and those who don't have to somehow skip that part of the tech tree and jump straight to renewables/nuclear?

I can see why the countries that were not first to industrialise are not on board with that idea.

I think you’re deliberately being obtuse.

The rights holders that got a settlement out of Anthropic spent two years and probably a fortune fighting in court. If that’s “easy”, then sure, this is a solved problem and there’s no point discussing it.

> An example where no one attemped to hold anyone liable isn't a counterexample to what happens when we do.

Yes it is (specifically, a counter example to it being easy, not that it’s possible). The whole world saw HuggingFaces get hacked and the collective legal response was crickets. The same world that’s had its legal system throw the DMCA and unauthorised access to computers legal book at researchers, games preservationists and random people trying to access media that they can’t licence in their region.

What does "weighted" mean in "emissions pre 1950 and post 2000 are weighted completely different"?

The chart you're responding to has no weighting, 1 tonne of CO2 produced is 1 tonne of CO2 produced regardless of when.

The shenanigans AI companies have been up to recently (including boasting about criminal behaviour hacking other companies) without repercussions is pretty good proof that it isn't "easy".

Did you read the article? It's saying that DNSSEC as an implementation to prevent MITM is flawed; other solutions that protect against MITM are proposed.

> so passionately about the reverence of `co.uk`

It's not reverence? I think that you're missing that it was a requirement. Basically every country (that followed ICANN's original rules) does this: .com.au, .co.nz, .co.jp, .com.mx, .co.ke (+ the org/net variants for each country)

The US is the only country where registering .com was allowed by ICANN (and not .com.us or something).

ICANN relaxed these rules in the 2010s I think, so now you can register 2LDs at most/all of those country TLDs.

It already doesn't work.

> Weckert tested the shirt using Yolo, an open-source, real-time AI object detection system.

Tested one of the images from the article here: https://playground.roboflow.com/models/ultralytics/yolo26 which detects a person just fine.

(It's already a bad sign that it was tested with "Yolo" and no more details about version/variant/size)

No one making statements has an incentive to tell the truth though (in fact, they're all incentivised to keep proclaiming the RAMpocalypse will never end).

Producers (Samsung, SK Hynix etc.) will not say "prices expected to drop" or "demand expected to drop" even if it was true because then consumers would start delaying purchased.

The big buyers (OpenAI, hyperscalers etc.) have no incentive to say "supply expected to start opening up" because that would imply their growth trajectory is flattening; also a huge part of their moat now is just deployed RAM.

I'm not sure what you're arguing? I'm responding to:

>> This way, LLMs add a bunch of comments, but it doesn't affect your actual experience in trying to read the code

by saying that at least reading the code and generating comments is forcing some understanding. Is there a disagreement in that?

You're saying that it's not (necessarily) enough understanding, which may be true but beside the point.

Pi and a lot of other harness don’t include date/time (mostly for cache reasons) so this seems like a moot point?

Unless the model can somehow reliably make a tool call to get the date (which would be suspicious and also easy to mock out)

Gross Domestic Product is measuring *domestic* output, so adjusting for *domestic* pricing makes sense.

Measuring it in a foreign currency doesn’t without accounting for that is just answering “how many iphones can country X afford” (handwaving away the nuances of what GDP measures with “afford”) which might be a statistic you care about but probably isn’t (and isn’t for the point that was being made).

Wait, how was it illegitimate? That's not an argument that I've heard.

I would say even smaller; but more than 90% of those SLAs will have explicit remediation and compensation clauses, hence “usually” wrt. to negotiating an SLA.

Depends on the SLA. Usually you negotiate an SLA to cover much more than a refund of the missed service targets (but with a fixed/known ahead of time cost for breaching the SLA).

> Servers have to run, transactions settled, fraud detected and the system protected against cyberattacks. For years, the government has helped compensate banks and payment firms for providing a service that has effectively been treated as public infrastructure.

Sounds like it should just be public infrastructure and the government pays to maintain it.

Governments have paid to maintain a finance system since the introduction of token money (by minting the currency as a public good; also funding policing to prevent counterfeit) so this is effectively the same.

> Multiple Profiles

> Firefox has robust profile support which creates completely separate identities. If you have a Work profile and a Personal profile and want to sync each, you need separate Mozilla accounts for each, though.

Depending on your use case, you should check out https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

It has completely eliminated my need to have multiple browser profiles.

Police have the strongest worker's unions in the country...

I knew before opening the page that it was someone in the police department.

I remember talking to a Seattle PD officer about how they could consistently earn more overtime hours in fortnight than there are in a fortnight with the right schedule/time-off choreography with everyone else in the department. And that’s on top of their “regular” hours.

> “Have it done by a week from today”, he ordered

I’m glad judges are sick of their feet dragging. I’m sad it’s not happening to Apple too though.

That’s answering why use a text based UI.

GP is asking why we’re stuck with TTYs (the typewriter interface) as the mechanism for applications to draw the text based UIs.

They are actively losing customers to less hostile options (mostly macOS, but also Linux).

They already know it's a problem: https://blogs.windows.com/windows-insider/2026/03/20/our-com...

So it is genuinely crazy that they are still doing things like this.

Edit: I should also add that a migration away from Windows has a huge network effect so its important for them to stop the bleeding to prevent them hemorrhaging users later.

This. Also, I think reading the exact same sentence structure, style and voice everywhere I go is getting mentally taxing.

Before I could read different articles, posts and emails on different topics from different authors and read a variety of ways of expressing things. Now it's just the same way of expressing a point and I think the lack of variety is what triggers the fatigue.

I used to be mostly indifferent on LLM generated writing and didn’t understand why it bothered people (especially on HN) so much.

Either a switch in my brain flipped or something is making them all sound like they’re perpetually trying to make a sales pitch.

No one talks or writes like this:

> So the flags are a filter, not a verdict. Every alert still ends with a human reading the diff. I'd rather say that than pretend the classifier is smarter than it is.

Especially not for a post ostensibly capturing legalese change in company TOSs.

Did I start noticing it more or is the writing getting worse?

I've started email the customer support of pages that have overzealous CF settings saying that it's a pain and that if they want to keep me as a customer they need to fix it.

Most give a canned response of "we can't do anything" ̄\_(ツ)_/ ̄ but some small sites do something. GitLab has the most annoying CF bouncer and I moved my company off them once I got the we can't do anything about it response.

That's my point - GSL is NOT MSVC only, it's a general purpose library and NOT a standard library implementation of a toolchain so any compiler is expected to be able to compile it (it also explicitly targets clang & gcc).

> The fundamental and defining property of football

Are you sure it's not that you use your foot to manipulate a ball?

Herb Sutter's comment on why it's ok is confusing to me:

> Regarding the use of UB internally: It's okay and if anyone is worried about it the use of UB is benign on the platforms we target (e.g., they don't involve hitting any hardware trap representations for these types)

Isn't the outcome of the UB (ie. whether it will "rm -rf /" or something else) dependent on both the target and the compiler? And the compiler (or future compiler) could plausibly make the assumption that the narrowing to an unrepresentable value will never occur and change behaviour because of it?