jonas21

Yeah, ironically, it's the BBB, which used to rate businesses based in part on how much the business paid them (without disclosing this to consumers, of course).

https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/business-bureau-best-ratings-...

The frontier moves over time. If you stay at any one spot, it will eventually mature and become less fun and interesting. There will be more of the clock-in / clock-out types, and that's perfectly fine -- as you pointed out above, at different stages in life, people may be looking for different things, like stability.

But if you're looking for that spark and excitement again, you need to get back out to the frontier. One frontier that is particularly exciting to me is using AI to speed up the tedious parts of the development process, and to tackle areas where I don't have specialist knowledge. Similarly to how Linux opened up a powerful OS to individuals, AI is enabling individuals to create things that would have previously required large teams.

I mean there's this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Line,_Saudi_Arabia

No matter what you think of it, you can't say it's not an immense-scale project requiring decades of construction.

The board could issue more stock, which would dilute existing shareholders by about 0.1% and (in theory) cause the stock price to drop by 0.1%.

But yeah, it's probably easier to just use cash on hand.

NVDA stock is up 3.5% so far today, which is ~$150B, or slightly more than one Intel. $5B is pocket change in comparison.

It makes sense to target ridesharing while the tech is being developed because:

(a) you can amortize the large up-front cost of the hardware over many more trips per day.

(b) you can geographically restrict where the vehicle operates to areas you've mapped in detail and know to be relatively safe

(c) you can collect lots of raw data for training and allow remote operators to assist if the vehicle gets stuck (many people would have privacy concerns if their personal car was doing this).

Over time, the hardware cost will come down, geographic availability will increase, and the need for remote assistance will decrease. Then you might start to see ones you can fully own.

At that point, though, the question becomes would you want to own one? Particularly if ride-share vehicles are ubiquitous and you can nearly instantly summon one that's exactly the type you need no matter where you are.

> Since the 1980s, we have been consistently taxing less.

Assuming "we" means the United States, this isn't really true. Tax revenue as a percentage of GDP has been remarkably stable, not just since the 1980s, but since the end of World War II [1].

The long-term average since 1945 is 16.85%, the average in the 1970s (i.e. the decade before the 80s) was 16.76%, and the average in the 2020s is 16.96%.

[1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFRGDA188S

It's funny you should mention that because years ago, I did own a mini-fridge with a freezer section, and after a few years the freezer stopped working. I was still glad to have had it while it lasted.

It's only the networked features that are being discontinued. You can still use the Nest as a "dumb" thermostat. Assuming you wanted a smart thermostat, surely a smart thermostat that reverts to being a dumb thermostat after 10-15 years is better than a dumb thermostat.

If going from a product with miniscule market share and no revenue to a $610M exit is a tragic unforced downfall, I really need to start failing more.

South Korea has a number of unusual regulations, including extremely strict restrictions on spatial data [1] and an AI law that, among other things, requires foreign companies to have a representative physically in South Korea to answer to the government [2]. So it's not too surprising to see it on the list.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictions_on_geographic_dat...

[2] https://cset.georgetown.edu/publication/south-korea-ai-law-2...

This is a civil case. The point is to remedy the situation, not to punish a crime.

Do you not see ChatGPT and Claude as viable alternatives to search? They've certainly replaced a fair chunk of my queries.

It's probably worth pointing out that the author is a founder of beehiiv, a Substack competitor.

I think they just missed the segue from the intro (about the caning of Charles Sumner) to the body of the article (about gutta-percha).

The two are only tangentially related in that the cane happened to be made of gutta-percha, and its easy to miss the sentence where they mention this because it's sandwiched between a large image and a form to subscribe to the newsletter.

Maybe on a mediocre team. But that was the parent comment's point.

On well-functioning teams, product feedback shouldn't have to be filtered through layers of management. In fact, it would be dishonest to discuss something like this with managers while hiding it from the rest of the team.

You omitted an important part of the sentence (in italics below):

> The MP initiated a conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers through the on-duty supervisor of flying (SOF). The MA held for approximately 50 minutes while the team developed a plan of action.

So it was the SOF on the conference call, relaying information to and from the pilot over the radio. This is more clear if you read the sequence of events on pages 7-10.

Not that it makes that much of a difference. Either way, he's up there waiting for the engineers on the ground to troubleshoot the problem.

What exactly are you basing this assertion on (other than your feelings)? Are you accusing Google of lying when they say in the technical report [1]:

> This impact results from: A 33x reduction in per-prompt energy consumption driven by software efficiencies—including a 23x reduction from model improvements, and a 1.4x reduction from improved machine utilization.

followed by a list of specific improvements they've made?

[1] https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/measuring_the_envi...

The article is surprisingly unclear about this, but the enhanced subsidies that are expiring apply to households making over 4x the Federal poverty level ($62,600 for a single person or $128,600 for a family of 4). Subsidies for those making less remain intact.

No, the question was whether "the same size space of apartments" (i.e. apartment buildings occupying the same land area as the datacenter) would use more or less water than the datacenter.

Under reasonable assumptions, the apartments would use more water.

- Google's datacenter complex in the Dalles covers ~190 acres.

- Typical density for apartment buildings is 50 units/acre, meaning you'd have 9,500 units on 190 acres.

- Average household size in the US is 2.5, so the 9,500 units would have a population of 23,750.

- According to the original article, per capita domestic water usage in the U.S. is 82 gallons per day, meaning a total water consumption of 710M gal/yr for the apartments. And this doesn't count the substantial indirect water usage you'd need to support this population.

- The Google datacenter uses 355M gal/yr (per the Oregonian article).

- 710M > 355M

Now, it would be somewhat ridiculous to replace the entire Google datacenter with apartment buildings in a rural town with declining population, but that was the original question...

And that article is a summary of a book that contains an interview with a guy who is describing a test that took place around 2017.

I think it's less that they sat on their laurels and more that a team of 2 had trouble keeping up with the dozens of well-paid folks working on VSCode. Which suggests that perhaps a shareware model did not work out so well for them.

So you're saying they're basically right, but 5 or 10 years too optimistic on the timeline?

They're used a lot on mobile. Apple uses their "neural engine" NPU to power their on-device ML stuff and Samsung does something similar in their Exynos processors. Apple also exposes the NPU to developers via CoreML.

There was a movie from the 80s with this premise. When I mention this to people, I'm usually surprised to find out that I'm the only one in the group who's seen it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster%27s_Millions_(1985_fi...

Look, I hate to be that guy, but according to your own comment [1], it sounds like you started this fight when you tried to block them from registering the "Deepki" trademark in the EU.

They were perfectly happy to coexist with your project -- and nobody was going to confuse "Deepkit", a TypeScript framework, with "Deepki", a real estate sustainability platform.

But then you tried to stop them from registering their own name (which they had been using for years before you started your project). Why would you do this? They responded by filing to invalidate your trademark, which, given the circumstances, seems pretty reasonable. In the end, they won.

You say that you registered a trademark so that you could "live peacefully." Perhaps the lesson to learn is if you want to live peacefully, don't go around picking fights.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44894521

> GitHub is completely unrecognizable compared to how it was before being gamified and turned into social media.

Huh? The whole premise on which Github was founded was that it was "social coding". The phrase was even in the logo in the early days [0]. Social features like stars, following, and the activity feed have been there from very early on.

If anything, I feel like Github has become a lot more corporate and enterprisey since getting bought by Microsoft.

[0] https://github.blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/3e6c0720-b15a...

It's likely that the skills you'd learn as an entry-level engineer today will be mostly irrelevant to being a senior 10 years from now -- just as knowing how to write a program on punch cards is irrelevant to today's engineers.

Seniors will have to come from somewhere, but it wouldn't be through this pipeline, even if companies were still hiring at full rate for entry-level work.

For some just getting into the field, this could be a great opportunity -- if you can figure out where the puck is heading, you can skate directly there.

How much would you be willing to pay for a replacement?

When they say "the start", I think they mean the start of the current LLM era (circa 2017). The main story of this time has been a rejection of the idea that major conceptual breakthroughs and complex architectures are needed to achieve intelligence. Instead, it's better to focus on simple, general-purpose methods that can scale to massive amounts of data and compute (i.e. the Bitter Lesson [1]).

[1] http://www.incompleteideas.net/IncIdeas/BitterLesson.html