fuckHNtho

see his rebuttal here: https://tessier-lavigne-lab.stanford.edu/news/false-allegati...

storage was 100% of the contest, the rest was affectation

All we're seeing here is the continuation of people with the means distancing themselves from the toxic brand.

This and the excuses people make for still working there draw hilarious parallels with the Nazis.

At the same time you are complaining about how the media handle scientific milestones (and this is unquestionably a major one), you are adopting the short term, one track, 24 hour news cycle perspective the media has spoonfed you. Global warming is only one problem. We don't need to give it a monopoly on concern. We need to push for a more nuanced, sophisticated longer term view on the major obstacles that guide a civilization. "Energy" in the public conversation should be about more than global warming.

Fusion is an energy solution that would set us up for billions of years. If we figure it out any time in the next millennium we'll have hit the jackpot.

Your take is like getting upset someone mentioned computing but didn't talk about javascript. You'd rather articles not be written about fusion until it's ready to heat your frozen pizza? God forbid we flood the news cycle with scienific progress and detract from what Elon thinks about cabbage.

Edit: for those of you feeling slightly anxious you missed new Elon gossip about cabbage, I made that up.

certainly the need to exaggerate the news has crept through all facets of media in this annoying "attention is our commodity" era. even the most "boring" outlet has its more subtle versions of the cringey YT "wow face" thumbnail.

but just because fusion energy will not be responsible for warming your frozen pizza next week does not mean we need to belittle a major milestone like this one. sure some damn reporter has a quota to hit and metrics to game. it just means we need to dedicate a bit more effort to read the article, read between the lines, and apply critical thinking.

this is the dream technology of the far future we're talking about. it doesnt even need to happen for 1000 years. if we nail it we are set for Billions of years. but obviously people are not accustomed or incentivized to think about things on that sort of timeline.

My cynical take is a lot of people are subconsciously unhappy with how BS and mundane their "tech" jobs are. They chose money+cool, only it turns out the 'cool' part was a lie to get them to churn out as much useless BS work as possible. So they get through the day by fooling themselves: slap a cool tech name on your product, make trendy graphics ( https://traefik.io https://github.com ), pretend you're doing some sci fi shit. Then any real tech happening in the world exposes your BS so you need it to be framed as a disappointment.

Ah I should have been more specific. He said ~"youre wrong", then some hours later, after Musk had prompted him for a real argument, he made an attempt at a constructive response. By "up front", I mean on tweet 1.

His argument wasn't even that great (because there is no good argument, and that's why one wouldn't take the bait if they actually like their job), and by then I'm afraid the axe had already been sharpened.

oh come on though, eric was playing for a severance package.

If you're going to call out a sensitive ego in public, bring the facts up front.

tldr tangential babbling that HN protects and wants us to admire...because reddit YC darlings. it almost makes me feel nostalgic.

Why are we to take yishan as an authority on content moderation, have you BEEN to reddit?! the kind of moderation of repetitive content he's referring to is clearly not done AT ALL.

He does not put forth any constructive advice. be "operationally excellent". ok, thanks. you're wrong about spam. you're wrong about content moderation. ok, thanks. who is his audience? he's condescending the people who are dialed into online discourse inbetween finding new fun ways to plant trees and design an indulgent hawaiian palace. i expected more insight, to be honest. but time and time again we find the people at the top of internet companies are disappointingly common in their perspective on the world. they just happened to build something great once and it earned them a lifetime soapbox ticket.

ok, thanks.

because nobody wants to invest so much time to join your cheesy fantasyland? whining about downvotes wont save you

agh yes! i agree, i was very disappointed when i made a trip there ten years ago

meta, metaverse, sandberg.. all these things are happening simply because they saturated fb user growth. stock market doesnt care how big you are, they just want growth. meta is flailing about in the water, if they cant find growth from somewhere they will drown. (and i will celebrate)

I, too, have been reading HN for more than 3 hours.

"predicting the future was obvious in the past, but a lot harder in the present."

...really?

you call yourself a generalist because you're proud of your accomplishments or because you actually think you have greater breadth than the average X human?

can you weld?

brave < chrome < webkit < typed on apple product?

...thats what i was getting at :P

i mean yeah, yandex is the #1 russian tech company. literally the russian google.

yes, this is the obvious explanation and i dont get why public discussion can't make any progress but insists on throwing out the same "i dont think my mom wants to live inside minecraft yet" weak take every chance it gets.

edit: it coincided with fb reporting saturated user numbers

Sure that's your hardware. What's your browser?

yes...this is the trending HN narrative. but do you have any evidence to support this take? i read certain takes on HN soo often i start to feel i know them for fact, but do we really? Some of them are probably very wrong. Why couldnt tiktok just be doing the same things as meta, but a whole lot better?