mattlutze

> By using the tools available at the time we did, certainly.

Yes, tools which help. But the point is that education occurs with any collection of tools, or even the simplest of all, if we want to go so broad as to call speech technology.

Technology is an augmenter of education, but not the fundamental problem of education.

> I do think

I'm not sure whether they should have a role, or what that roll should be, as such a feeling would be moralizing to some degree. But I agree that we will _make_ LLMs have a role, because the capitalism that drives our societies wants them to have a role.

Technology is a tool to expand the possible ways to educate, but isn't necessary for education to happen.

i.e. we've been educating people for 1,000s of years even without textbooks.

Education itself isn't primarily a technology problem. Treating it as such is an administrative failure, as is pursuing a technological solution in many scenarios that are first social in nature.

Mattermost is great, we've used it at a few places and it's very flexible.

Extensibility and integrations with learning management systems, as well as owning all your data, makes it sound like a great option in particular for an education-oriented organization.

And I imaging the AWS or GCP costs for hosting it won't be as high as what Slack wants.

If you think for yourself—like you should do, absolutely—and look at this situation through all of the information that has come out, how can you conclude that the overwhelmingly unilateral and indiscriminate violence being acted on this territory is reasonable, justified, and not a systematic eradication of the people who live there?

I would really like to understand the based & logical reasoning that you use to arrive at this position.

In this situation, where you advocate for waiting until a different organization gives its opinion: while waiting, will net-more harm have occurred if Israel

1. reduces the volume and density of violence being acted on that territory, or 2. continues, as it is currently doing, to increase the volume and density of violence being acted on that territory

Is there a different answer, should this other organization’s opinion affirm or refute genocide?

Recall please Grover Norquist. In the 90s and 2000s he leveraged proximity with the post-Reagan new conservative wave to grow a relatively modest org, Americans for Tax Reform, to a near universal policy chokehold on the Republican party.

Through a socially viral "no net new tax" promise, once Norquist secured pledges from party leaders, essentially all federal elected Republicans had to pledge as well. They were otherwise threatened with losing endorsement from Norquist and faced being ostracized and primaried. The leaders themselves were then caught in the net and none felt like they could break.

ATR influence has waned in the face of MAGA's more populist fiscal liberalism, but that was pretty much just one guy.

Extend that singular goal to a network with a narrow and aligned interest, and it can be very effectively maintained with intelligent and shifting messaging and reputation management. Consider how people like Loomer and Raichik that have emerged, not through established power brokers, but organically through social media platforms, and the significant influence they possess even in the White House.

That would be a boon to the conservative movements, for sure. And also ensure that almost nothing gets done unless it is extremely populist.

That's the benefit and frustration of the democratic or representative democratic process.

Balance access to governance with fairness, and accept that you will never always get your way.

Similar to this, indeed some kind of fair and predictable cooling off period for a piece of legislation ensures the governing body isn't frozen in one influential faction's obsessions, while also allowing the voice of the people that faction represents to still be heard.

But exponential backoff feels too open to be gamed by countervailing factions. Some small period of time within a session however could make sense.

For the longest time there were plenty of locations in the US that were also blurred. The Naval Observatory, Vice President's residence/office in DC, for example.

It's not anymore, though the maps are lower quality over DC now and the USG can just compel Google to edit the tiles to obscure details of sensitive sites.

I love a page that doesn't react to my browser width.

I love a page that doesn't react to my browser width.

It's very simple to found a company in the US that has access to the entire 50 states and all of the investors therein, with a single/simple accounting to manage. And you don't have to live in the US to do it.

Europe/EU/EEA don't have a comparable setup. Found in one country, deal with workers in many, filings in all of the countries you're doing business, and more.

The new proposed EU Incorporation would go a long way to lowering the bar for getting started and accessing pools of funds between investors in different countries.

> Mistral is the only serious "AI" company in the EU right now (if you exclude company working on the hardware side).

While Mistral is the one directly in the front of the Frontier LLM race at the moment, I would encourage you to also look at DeepL and Proton. They both actually have a sophisticated and significant setups for model research and deployment.

Give the project an actual look.

It is a systematic approach to deconstructing and composing a story through standardized schemas, and sounds like it should or would inform something like the OP's visual representation system.

Here's a fun timeline to walk through how it developed and why it's been, while not trivial, implemented with a kind of structural uniformity to keep the problem space contained.

https://www.europeanpaymentscouncil.eu/about-sepa/sepa-timel...

I'm a little surprised how many Chromium browser builders we have in the market, and how each continues to convince a group of investors that _they_ are going to be the ones to finally get it right, while still building on Chrome's skeleton.

But, there's a bunch on WebKit and Gecko as well.

One might suggest Cromebooks have done so well because Google got it more or less right.

Fast and cheap transactions are legit use cases.

If you actually offered those US businesses with instant, verifiable transfers that cost nearly nothing, do you actually think they wouldn't move to that?

SEPA also works easily because it's single currency for a single unified economic zone. If currency change was involved then you'd likely be back to routing through central banks or currency change banks and such.

> a few days ago, i had the surreal experience of joining a private fireside chat with werner vogels, the cto of amazon, during startup summit 2025 in florianópolis. it's one thing to follow his talks online – it's another to be in the same room, listening to him unpack two decades of lessons from building some of the most critical infrastructure on the internet.

It seems he does indeed tell us that he was a listener in a small-audience conversation that Vogels had.

No pop psychology maxim is universally true. However in your example we're presented with the outdated understanding of "tech debt."

> As an example, it is possible to solve very many business or operational problems with a simple service sitting in front of a database.

If this is the simplest approach within the problem space or business's constraints, and meets the understood needs, it may indeed be the right choice.

> At scale, you can continue to operate, but the amount of man-hours going into keeping the lights on can grow exponentially. Is the simplest thing possible still the DB?

No problem in a dynamic human system can be solved statically and left alone. If the demands on a solution grows, and the problem space or business's needs changes, then the solution should be reassessed and the new conditions solved for.

Think of it alternatively as resource-constrained work allocation, or agile problem solving. If we don't have enough labor available (and we rarely do) to solve everything "best," then we need to draw a line. Decades of practice now have shown that it's a crap shoot to guess at the shape of levels of complexity down the road.

Best case you spend time that could go into something else valuable today, to solve a problem for a year from now; worst case you get the assumptions wrong and fail to solve that second "today" problem as well as still needing to spend future time on refactoring.

That's an unsupported assertion.

Lots of non-Ukranian Europeans still want to move to the US for example, because there's an idea that in skilled jobs you can make more money in the US.

Likewise, India isn't "kept" in poverty nor is the country at war, but the opportunity for economic prosperity elsewhere is a strong driver for migration. And when India surpasses the US or Europe in economic prospects, the trend will reverse and enterprising people will flock to e.g. Hyderabad and New Delhi.

Economic prosperity, until we do away with capitalism, probably won't ever be homogeneous. Where there's a potential across a circuit the electrons will flow.

Perhaps you've misread the quote? It and your counter affirm each other.

The quote suggests that there won't be labor shortages in markets that have adequate and adaptive immigration policies, because migration into a country with an aging population is how countries today maintain their labor pools.

That the global population will continue to grow into 2100 supports their assertion that all countries should be more immigration friendly so as to reap the bi-directional benefit of available labor moving into geographies that need workers.

The DGX Spark being just $3-4,000 with 4TB of storage, 128GB unified memory, etc (or the Mac Studio tbh) is a great indicator that Local AI can soon be cheap and, along with the emerging routing and expert mixing strategies, incredibly performant for daily needs.

Web 2.0/the Social Web vacuumed the novelty and Unique Selling Proposition out of our physical 3rd spaces, leading to their decline, and to the decline of related activities like the serendipitous chance of running into friends and meeting someone new.

The social web in a lot of ways led to our isolation and the amplification of the loneliness epidemic.

Now, these Web 2.0 / Social Web companies are the leaders in building the AI that may artificially treat the epidemic they created.

There's something quite cynically sad about that, and I would love it if we'd move away from these services and back into the "real world."

I'm currently on hiatus from work and took it on myself to build some passion projects. It's been really fun to strictly build with HTML5, hand-jammed CSS and I've been learning HTMX for some dynamic content.

They are soooo simple, but still feel like web applications I've seen significant businesses built around. I hope to drive more projects this direction when I'm at work again.

I can't remember the last time something truly annoying happened, but I just ran into it demo'ing a few of the newer vibey low-code app builders, which warned me to be using a Chromium build because of how they built their tool, e.g. Bolt

You posted a camera comparison blog post to a nerd site, and there's plenty of camera nerds here. You might find that it's not the audience you were looking for, if you weren't intending to be objective or rigorous in your comparison.

But also, very fun to see the Copper Country featured on hacker news!

I am surprised how many people have so many problems with Firefox.

I've never felt impeded by loading speeds, and my ADHD regularly has me forgetting to restart it, to the tune of 100+ tabs open across multiple desktops. My wimply little MacBook Pro doesn't seem to mind.

The only downside I've found is that, because so many people just default to "Chrome or nothing," there's occasionally sites that have bugs because, like was the case in the 90s with Internet Explorer, the site developers took the idiomatic Chrome way of building a feature instead of something universal.

If geography is a factor in the value of an asset, being able to move that asset allows you the ability to effect change in the value of it. I.e., my car might sell for x in one city, but only 0.7x in another.

As an immovable asset's value cannot be changed in the same ways as a movable one's, perhaps there are different ways to tax it that are still fair, or encourage positive social effects.