At first I thought “that’s a very specific shopping list for fridge magnets”. :)
8,643 karma · joined November 4, 2011
Email: jerad @ my HN user name + .com
I also don’t believe addiction and other psychological exploits are used for the sole purpose of ad revenue. There are other more direct forms of monetization involved, such as microtransactions and subscriptions.
If you really want to blame something, it really all comes down to one word:
Greed.
I’ve had a Stanford orthopedist (remotely) review my records, and he feels that surgery may be the only thing that can get me back to 100% (RoM or pain).
PT may help, but it can’t heal the damage that’s been done.
100%. But I do like to hear anecdotes, since I know no one personally that's had shoulder surgery.
But agree that everyone's different, and everyone's experiences are different, so I take it with a grain of salt for sure.
But still appreciated!
I really need to figure out whether it's going to make things better or worse, but unfortunately, that feels like something a doctor can't guarantee one way or the other.
Any anecdotes or other experiences/thoughts are appreciated.
Appalling, yes. But also expected. I'm surprised they haven't been the target of scrapers for years. But sites putting their content behind login walls and other anti-bot mechanisms has certainly exacerbated this. But again, this isn't at all a surprising progression.
> we've also already seen some sites opt out of the Wayback Machine to prevent their content from being scraped via this alternative route.
To be fair, another big motivation was likely users on sites like HN using archive.org (and similar sites) to get around their paywalls. In fact, I'd be surprised if this wasn't a big motivator.
Again, it sucks, but it's not at all surprising to see it progress like this. I wouldn't be surprised to see similar blocks on other archive sites eventually.
A company can make their produce suck, on purpose (out of malice), because it fits their bottom line better (at least, in the short term) vs. a better UX.
OP may simply be asking companies to put their customers ahead of their (short-term) profit.
Reddit is another great example of this, where users have been looking for workarounds to their (increasingly more) hostile login wall since they started pressuring people to use their app years ago.
Most games are human-centric, so until we're able to move around using our legs & feet, stick locomotion is still the preferred way to get around in a human-centric simulated environment.
There are still many issues that VR hasn't solved (and may never solve).
- You still have to wear a device on your head
- You still (can) get motion sickness and/or headaches
- There is still not a lot of great content around VR
- Many people still prefer the flat screen medium and content
The openness/closeness is only one of the many issues this solves, and it doesn't matter when all of the other above issues exist.
Man, I hate my Hanes pajama shorts right now. The pockets are way too shallow. Probably even for the iPhone Mini. My phone falls out all the time. And I’m too lazy/cheap to buy new shorts, because they’re good shorts otherwise.
Whoever designed them definitely did not get this memo.
I hopped back in a couple years later after a few updates, and agree that the quantity of content was pretty big. But the quality was not -- it still felt "empty", and never held my interest long.
Last year, the same thing happened. I hopped back on after a few big updates, probably spent another 10 or so hours on it (I think I started over), and felt like I had explored all there was.
I feel like all the criticisms it gets are valid. I agree that the effort of maintaining a game after 10 years is incredibly admirable, especially since ever update has been free. That's amazing. And the devs should be acknowledged for that.
But the game itself still feels largely empty. The progression feels mostly repetitive without feeling like you're really moving forward in a meaningful way. And, as others have said, the proc gen still feels "vanilla".
I probably won't hop back in after this update. I've learned, by now, that while many praise the new content, it'll probably just feel like more of the same to me.
I feel like people are much more pessimistic towards technology in general, vs. the days you're referring to. Big Tech was still "cool" then, the wealth divide wasn't as big as it is now, social media wasn't (as) toxic, and AI wasn't actively making everything worse.
Nowadays, it's hard to be optimistic for how technology is progressing. People do hack away and share interesting, fun, and (often) useless projects, and those still draw less pessimistic discussion. But these are the exception, among other news of how technology is getting worse, or making things worse.
So I guess my point is, it not so much that HN or the community has gotten worse, but there's just less to be excited about in tech these days.
My impression is they're actually way overpriced relative to their quality/value, and get away with it due to effective marketing and aesthetic design.
To be fair, I've never owned a Dyson product, but have used them, and they just seem meh at best.
Just really surprised to see a Dyson announcement get upvotes on HN.
That’s an illusion that died a long time ago, unfortunately.
Just because you’re using their service on a browser doesn’t stop them from harvesting data from your usage, especially if you’re logging in (and if you’re using their services, chances are that you are).
Using browser over app can help, but it doesn’t eliminate it.
Like it or not, we’re the product, and I don’t see that changing anytime soon.
From a quick search, I can’t find evidence of this. If anything, pilots are in the air more of their week/lives vs. flight attendants.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/08/19/health/flight-attendants-pilo...
For anything that makes money, it feels like a huge step down in productivity, even with the downsides of agent-assisted code.
As you said, everything in moderation. But many people far exceed the level of moderation.
I see couples/families often sitting in restaurants on their phones.
I see people sitting at intersections on their phones.
I see people driving while on their phones.
People often walk from point A to point B but spending much of that walk on their phones.
I rarely see people waiting somewhere without having to jump on their phones.
Again, moderation is fine, but I’d argue many are well beyond that point.
It’s uncontroversial that sleep is necessary and healthy, walking is necessary and/or healthy, working is (mostly) necessary (regardless of whether it’s healthy), and blinking is necessary and healthy.
The implication is that there’s almost zero about screen time that is healthy or necessary, with some exceptions.
And that this has become recently common. Prior to the Information Age, it was less common that we spent this much time on screens.
People that did were called “couch potatoes”.
I’m simply playing devil’s advocate, because engineers can believe one thing, but until employers believe it, it doesn’t matter much.
I’m also not convinced that the reality of LLMs will never catch up with what employers think they can do.
It may never happen, but it very well could.
Either way, I feel the days of employers being ok with handwriting code are limited.
All that matters is whether they agree with you.
The only control you have over this is to either a) work for yourself, or b) keep looking until you find an employer that agrees with you.
My argument is that the number of employers that fall under (b) is shrinking.
That would be more equivalent to writing the code and immediately deleting it.
Except this code is being deployed, and it is still (mostly) functional, at least functional enough to satisfy your employer (their “hunger” in your analogy).
> Why should I use an LLM to write code? It cannot do the job I want it to.
Because your employer is convinced that it can do the job they want it to (whether it does the job you want it to do is irrelevant, unless you're the employer, in which case 100% handwrite your code).
Sure, but again, this assumes both that handwriting code sometimes outperforms LLMs, and also that your employer agrees with this.
I think it’s only a matter of time (again, if we’re not already there) before LLMs outperform handwritten code nearly all of the time.
And, even if that’s not the case, I’m pretty convinced nearly all employers believe this is true, whether it is or not.
So your employer only sees a “middle ground” as room for higher productivity.
> That is what will create new neurons and new connections, which is what will keep away the cognitive decline.
100% agree with this.
The problem is, your employer doesn’t care whether your brain is creating new neurons and connections. They care about productivity and profit.
I feel like the folks that believe we can continue to write code by hand are either in denial that LLMs will eventually (if not already) outperform handwritten code, or are in denial that employers will be ok with lower levels of productivity.
If you have the luxury of working for an employer that either doesn’t care or is oblivious to this, then 100% continue writing code by hand.
Or if you do work on the side (whether for fun or for profit) and are ok with lower productivity, then yes, stick to handwritten code.
But just because handwriting code is better for your brain and cognitive development, doesn’t mean that the industry will be in support of it.