martythemaniak

I watched South Park for almost 20 years, but stopped about a decade ago. Have the creators ever reconned with their role in normalizing and popularizing.. the current situation?

What I mean is, SP is one of most prominent cultural examples of " both sides are equally bad, everyone and everything sucks", they've had great success with this schtick, ManBearPig, Turd Sandwich, etc. They did a lot of prep work for the current regime, after all, once you but into their mindset, MAGA is the only thing that makes sense.

Have you ever wondered the same about other scams? Who else do you think was shaped "correctly"? Also, isn't affinity fraud most types of fraud?

The intense anti-DC sentiment shouldn't be surprising - NIMBYism is the only viable mechanism available to people in the US. It doesn't matter if you're worried about Glonzo or have real concerns, they must be expressed in NIMBY terms in order to be heard.

For example, imagine you're worried about what goes on inside those DCs, are worried about the lack of accountability from Big Tech and would like to see sensible consumer-protection regulations. Can you express that anywhere? Sure, you can leave random comments somewhere, but that doesn't matter. OTOH, you can actually join a local NIMBY group and slow things down. It's not what you want, but it's better than nothing. Same goes for people worried about clean energy and other issues.

I reject that for simple reasons of linear time. The GFC happened in 2008 and Dodd-Frank passed in 2010. Since then, there have been no large, notable regulations passed and Dodd-Frank was watered down a bit in 2018.

While Sarbanes-Oxley did make it substantially harder for small companies (market cap <$1B) to go public, there was a wave of very affordable and notable IPOs throughout the 2010s - Tesla at $2B, Shopify at $1B, Square at $3B, LinkedIN at $4B, etc. All of these have now grown substantially since their IPOs, with Square (absolute dog) being worth 10x their IPO. So yes, SOX killed micro-IPOs, but GFC/Dodd-Frank did not kill affordable IPOs.

Now, you're right that IPOs have grown a lot more expensive over time, but you're absolutely wrong to attribute it to increased regulations post GFC. The actual answer is much more closely related to what the article is talking about - VCs realized how much growth and returns they were leaving on the table and there has been substantial pressure on firms to stay private as long as possible, as well a huge increase in larger rounds and private credit. In fact, rather than increased regulations, there has been a loosening of regulations that allow investors to use SPVs (and SPVs of SPVs, and SPVs of SPVs of SPVs, a veritable matrioshka of SVPs) to get around the maximum number of shareholders a private company can have.

I have seen this first-hand - part of my investing strategy was to blindly buy cheap tech IPOs and that got me some great returns, but this strategy no longer works, because the VCs have effectively managed to hoover up any decent returns retail investors could get. Today you gotta be on AngelList or other platforms (only qualify investors, obviously, more exclusion) buying secondaries if you want decent returns.

I'm not disagreeing with you exactly - there are obviously reasons for doing all those things and on the surface they may seem sensible as well. But there are also good reasons why you'd do the exact opposite and my point is that in a group of independent thinkers you'd see greater diversity of opinions and outcomes. I was a middle manager involved in some of those layoffs (on both sides!) and saw the sausage made up close. Thing is, yes it's a shitty thing to do to someone personally, but nothing of what I saw could be justified in objective terms.

Well, we don't see a slight trimming of workforces, we see 20-80% layoffs in most cases with good financial performance. You see breathless claims of AI doing all the work one year, tokenmaxxing, then less than a year later everybody says don't spend so much on AI, progress wasn't as far as we expected. You see this in what people say about AI as well - one year everybody will be jobless in 5 years, next year "actually jobs are gonna be ok".

My point is that its hard to ignore just how in-tune and well-coordinated all these people are, and I don't think it's a coincidence. If CEOs were responding to actual political, economic and company developments, you'd see far more diversity of opinion. Some you see their companies are growing and profitable and wouldn't jump on the layoff bandwagon. Others may ask "Don't we need rule of law? What happens when the other party gets in power?" and fight the administration in courts etc.

I'll give you my diagnosis, which is derived from this: https://www.semafor.com/article/04/27/2025/the-group-chats-t...

The thing to realize about the SV executive class is that they have constructed a closed ecosystem around them where they only talk amongst themselves and a small number of supporting actors who say what the execs need to hear. A CEO will talk to other CEOs he will not talk to his skip reports. Alternative viewpoints or dissent are not part of this social circle, and despite their 'conterarian' self-image, there's an immense amount of social pressure to conform.

You can can see hints of this outside - for example this site used to see YC folks as regular commenters, but no more. Twitter was changed so that only views favoured by Musk show up prominently in replies. These people certainly do not encounter normal people in their day-to-day lives.

In this information environment you see extremely rapid horizontal spread of weird, stupid and esoteric ideas - one CEO does a layoff, all of them will do layoffs. One turns MAGA, they all turn MAGA, etc. One guy starts yapping about some snake oil, they all yap about snake oil. There no negative feedback loop there.

Some important notes

- Google updated their maps faster than the USGS. https://apps.nationalmap.gov/viewer/ shows Lake Ontario

- Google made this decision, there is nothing automated about this

- Apple will do this as well

- Nothing requires either of them to do this.

- This is the same as Cook giving gold to Trump, tech CEOs showing up at the inauguration, ballroom donations etc. That is, simple open bribery.

- While Googlers are probably against this, their opinions are moo (like a cow's opinion). Sergey and Sundar love this.

This may sound a little wacky, but one potential use case I'm considering is robotics. Say you want to use a fine-tuned mid-size VLM model right on the robot. You pretty much have to use the Jetson line, which has a great ecosystem and everything (depth cameras, lidar, SLAM, small segmentation models, etc) runs on it, but it's gets very expensive very fast if you want to run LLMs on it. The Jetson Thor lines are 3-5k depending on memory etc.

One very efficient option today is to have the cheapest Jetson (Orin Nano) run the classical robotics stack, then have a base mac mini run nothing but the VLM. The Mac mini is considerably cheaper and faster at these workloads than the mid-range Jetsons.

I think this wonky situation is because Apple us under immense consumer pressure to absorb the ridiculous memory prices, while the Jetson is aimed at "business" and much more likely to fluctuate with the market. Last year I bought a Jetson Orin Nano 8GB for $375CAD, today that official nVidia Amazon page is out of stock and other sellers have it listed for $900-$1100CAD. Absolutely bonkers pricing.

Framing Trump/MAGA as some kind of divine retribution against the sins of liberals great! All bad things are caused by liberals, because MAGA is mere reaction to their actions. MAGA have no mind of their own, and thus no responsibility for their own actions.

  > We use AI where semantic understanding and flexibility are useful, such as interpreting less structured information or understanding what in an unfamiliar scene is relevant to a procedure. Once the system knows what physical interaction it needs to perform, we prefer explicit geometry, planning, optimization, and control where possible. We're interested in the marriage between the two rather than trying to make every part of the robotics stack learned.

Congrats on the launch. I love this part, because it is also the working theory behind my robot clearing robot project (http://www.frost-e.com). I'm new to robotics, but it seems to me there's a gap between classic robotics tools and approaches (ROS2-based navigation, local YOLO-based object detection etc) and the video-input-to-actuator-output VLA models that robot labs are showcasing. In fact, I kinda think the big labs are trying to boil the ocean - long horizons, 6DoF actuator control, cross embodiment, generalization, etc etc.

Seems to me is that if you restrict the problem space, have well defined tasks, then marry the semantic understanding and reasoning of VLMs with the geometric tools of classical approaches, then you could have something practical and economical.

I'm having a hard time seeing the recent AI layoff mania as anything different.

There's also a great Great Art Explained feature on her: https://youtu.be/wgSBtXNJjhs

Gerrit. Now that's a name I've not heard in a long time. A long time

Question for Americans: do you guys understand what's happening?

The thing to keep in mind is that the current trade agreement was negotiated and signed by Trump himself. He has spent the last 18 months seeing what a terrible deal it is. He does not want a "deal" into conventional sense, that is an agreement that works for both parties. He needs the counterparty to be humiliated and subjugated. CUSMA (the current agreement he promoted and signed) is bad because it works for all parties, it does not subjugate and humiliate the counterparties.

What happened in these particular trade negotiations? Is that the actual negotiators had something worked out earlier in the week, then at the last minute the US made some new demand that was meant to humiliate Canada, and this tanked the negotiations. What exactly did they ask for? It's irrelevant, the point was humiliation.

Actual trade policy, whether you want access to Canadian dairy market, or lumber tarrif rates or whatever, none of that matters.

Is this a common understanding down south?

Edit: after I wrote the above, it came out that the thing they demanded last minute is restricting Canada's ability to trade with other countries. Obviously, no PM would agree to such a thing, it's purpose isn't to have a deal, but as I said, subjugation and humiliation. https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/livestory/us-canada-trade-war-...

I have to post my rant every time Idiocracy gets mentioned, so feel free to downvote (it is the best way to spend my karma!)

What we're seeing is fundamentally nothing like idiocracy - the similarities are only surface deep, but the structures are vastly different. In Idiocracy, the nation is led by a person who cares about the well-being of all his constituents and seeks out the most capable person in order to improve the material state of his people. Despite his wrestling persona, President Comacho is far, far, FAR closer to Jed Bartlet from the West Wing, than Trump. People in the 2000s could not imagine the true nature of the 2020s.

What you're seeing is a sort of slow-motion civil war. The Trumpist Republicans fundamentally believe only they are allowed to rule and everyone outside their group is an enemy. They despise their enemies and wish to see them suffer, from denying disaster relief, to targeting cities with ICE, the more suffering there is the better. Sadly, reality turned out nothing like Idiocracy.

You got RFK because half the population thought they were unique snowflakes who could not abide by the same simple rules as everyone else. The price he'll extract is significant impacts on health, wealth and well-being.

Is that when you entered that era? Or did you enter it when you were a newborn in the hospital, or a kid entering school?

If people downvoted pedantry, everyone on HN would have negative karma.

No, it's something closer to The Parable of the Green Grocer from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_the_Powerless. The MAGAfication of large parts of Tech means that lots of people see themselves as respectable, serious, insiders. Pointing out the utter ridiculousness of what they profess to believe is extremely gauche.

Well, there's an unspoken rule in SV/HN circles about when the take Trump's idiocies seriously and when to ignore them.

For example, "Gulf of America" and "Department of War" you're supposed to take seriously, and all SV communications feature these prominently. Correcting someone about the fact that "The Department of War" doesn't exist will get you downvoted, but apparently you're not supposed to take "Straight of Hormuz is US territory" seriously? I'm am very bad at discerning this rule.

> random blogger with high school math literacy

He's actually a well-known and widely promoted political activist on X. His niche is using technocratic language and a whiff of 'analysis' to advance MAGA policies.

I think declaring the Straight of Hormuz a US territory will solve this problem.

I'm skeptical that you can derive these conclusions from those assumptions. Here in Canada they are required to post the caloric content of the hot dogs, so even a 10% change in content will be obvious. A 37% cut means they would have changed the signs from 540 calories to 340, but nothing like that has happened.

For my current project, I tried going with a non-traditional style I personally liked, I call it "Soft Neo Brutalism". You can see it at: http://www.frost-e.com

I generally wanted web 1.0 simplicity, lots of contrast, but also a soft gentle colours and modern vibe. I also have a general design for use in dashboards/apps etc: https://frost-e.com/design-system/

The problem with this is that the list of tech that gets boring changes all time, faster than people's opinions. Kubernetes is very boring tech, but if you go through the old discussion threads on this (even from the last year or two), Kubernetes is still cited as some brand new wizbang thing you shouldn't spend tokens on.

I'm working on an autonomous snow clearing robot: https://www.frost-e.com/

The basic idea is that instead of trying to solve the general case in robotics (ie, the humanoid companies - multiple tasks, multiple environments, generalization, etc) which needs billions of capital, can you efficiently deploy current tech to robustly do one task in one environment for cheap.

They already do: https://qwen.ai/blog?id=qwen-robotsuite

Nvidia also releases their Cosmos series models.

I honestly wonder what world folks like you live in. The US is currently at war, repeatedly threatening several other places and engaged in several costly trade wars. From my Canadian perspective, you are a danger and a menace. China is a commodity supplier. Do the war crimes your country is currently committing not register for you at all? The daily threats, insults, and economic attacks on your 'allies', does that register?

China supports Russia in its war formally, but practically it sells Ukraine whatever it needs, because a weak vassal-like Russia is very much in their interests. The US is far, far more outspoken and active supporter of Russia in this war.

Finally, there will be no hot war with China. They'll likely blockade and invade Taiwan before the end of the decade, but the US will not do anything, partly because it'll be exhausted from it's never ending middle east wars, partly because it'll only take a small bribe to get Trump to back off. He's genuinely fond of dictators like Xi.

There's been a massive change to public markets in the last decade and the retail path to making money seems to have closed. I made a some money on IPOs using a laughably simple heuristic:

"Is the company market cap low? Do they have a decent product? Is it plausible they'll 10x? Yes -> Buy some amount I can afford loosing"

For example, Tesla IPO'd at $5B cap, it was perfectly plausible to believe they'd be worth $50B some day. Shopify IPO'd at $1.3B, Square at $3B, 10x was perfectly believable. Uber IPO'd at $75B, I did not believe they'd be worth $750B any time soon, or ever. Do I believe SpaceX will be worth 20T in like 10 years? Lol. Fmao even.

Today's IPOs at $1T+ means that private money figured this out and cut the retail public out, IPOs seems to be a really terrible deal these days.

Well, the 90s were a time of liberalization/deregulation so definitely a moving target, but the monopolies/layer of mediation were held back by variety cultural, regulatory and legislative checks. Glass-Steagall was repealed in '99, fairness doctorine was repealed in '87, but the mindset and expectations remained in place, the idea of Citizens United would have been considered absurd, agencies had stronger regulations, etc etc. Today you have a handful of people who control these companies (non voting shares) paying money directly to the president in return for preferential access. Laws and the public interest are not a part of any consideration.

Here's a practical example: your gmail account today is probably more important to you than your phone number was in the 90s and you can run afoul of some random ML subsystem and lose access. There is no recourse or accountability. Randomly loosing your phone number and not having recourse was not a thing back then.

But yes, I was on the internet in the 90s, the little playground we fled to has grown into a terrible panopticon run by unaccountable people for their own personal interest. NIMBY DC opposition is a terrible proxy to tackle this, but it may be the only tool available.