panny

looks down to me

https://www.digikala.com/

That's the cost of renting money (mortgage), not owning a home. I saved up cash and bought my home in cash. I did not have closing costs. Only the seller did. My closing cost was the price of the home.

I don't plan to sell. I'm not "investing" in the house. I'm living in it. Essentially, my home eliminates the biggest portion of my monthly expenses. I hope my home value goes down, a lot. Then I pay less on the one expense I do have associated with it: property taxes.

And I bet that Microsoft employee who was sending PRs to all the linux distros (and systemd) will not bother sending apologies to them for wasting their time.

Discarding misdirected mail is a felony (18 U.S. Code § 1702). For example, you receive a flyer in the mail addressed to John Smith who previously lived at your address. If it doesn't say "John Smith OR current resident" then discarding that junk mail is a felony. You are supposed to write "Return to sender" on every piece of junk mail or correspondence not addressed to you and put it in the outgoing mail. People discard junk flyers every single day without looking at the address first. Simple things like that.

To tie back into the original discussion on HIPAA, I had a collection agency sending mail addressed to a previous resident to my address once. The return address was the clinic of the patient. I was dutifully writing RTS on every letter and putting it back in the mail, but they would not take me off their nastygram list. That was until I wrote "You know, it's a felony HIPAA violation to be leaking this patient's name and clinic to me after you've been notified of the incorrect address." The collection letters immediately stopped after I did that.

There's also possible prison sentences. I just love it when someone wants to "get tough on X" when all the laws are already tough on X and just unenforced. That's how you end up with every American committing three felonies a day without knowing it.

>scienceaim

>!!

Junk science slop blog. Nice.

87.3%

AI GPT

zerogpt.com

https://i.imgur.com/9lT1VSp.jpeg

That's how it works for legal immigrants, yes.

>I had my fourth Covid infection just a month ago. Fully vaccinated, and having had it three times before, it still hit me like a brick.

My younger sibling, elderly mother, and I never vaccinated or caught covid, but my two older siblings both vaccinated and both caught covid several times each. My cousin is a nurse, vaccinated, caught covid, and lost hearing in one ear. Apparently hearing loss is a rare side effect of covid... I guess count yourself lucky that you didn't lose your hearing.

AI "steals" your code, but AI company says "that's a fair use."

AI generates application using a "predict the next word" algorithm built with the stolen/not stolen works. Nothing creative there, just statistics.

That application leaks, and now the company that stole/not stole the code originally claims they own the algorithmic output. https://github.com/github/dmca/blob/master/2026/03/2026-03-3...

One problem, you don't own that output. Either the original authors own it or nobody owns it because it's not creative... https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/LSB10922

Those are the legal options. You stole it or you don't own it. There is no steal and then you own. That's the core problem. AI companies have demonstrated that they will directly steal the work and they will use their money and influence to claim ownership of it.

I wonder how many of those booing used AI to write their term papers. From the teaching side, I hear AI has become an epidemic of students scamming their way into degrees.

I'll take a Giordano's over anything that New York is serving :) I don't care if you do call it a casserole.

I can see your comment, but I'm afraid I can't do anything to vouch for you since it's [flagged] and [dead]. Maybe build some karma with submissions and try again later. Anyway, regarding

>By implementing a parallel Multimerge algorithm in Rust

Are you comparing your parallel sort vs Java's Arrays.parallelSort() or are you saying your multithreaded parallel sort is faster than single threaded Arrays.sort()?

>Benchmarks show up to 38x speedups on high-entropy (random) datasets at the 10M element scale compared to standard Timsort/Arrays.sort.

Also, did you do a proper JVM warmup for your benchmarks if it is a comparison of parallel sorts?

Not at all. A couple of years ago the company I worked for told us "no more quizzing" for new hires. Like, none. And that was before an LLM could tell you the answer to every leetcode question in a single AI assisted search. I really think this is part of the reason juniors cannot get hired. They have no track record and quizzing seems to be indefensible now as a matter of employment law. You really have nothing to look at but track record now, and juniors have none.

>AI is going to take your job... we're hiring BTW!

lol

>IDEs are dead in the age of agentic coding.

I'm glad that works for you, but you'll pry my free software from my cold dead hands. :)

As an eclipse fan, I may have experienced a teensy bit of schadenfreude while reading this.

It seems the article forgot to mention Amazon's lawfare with things like the one-click patent. It is rather hard to startup and compete with a well funded rival that likes to sue competition out of business.

>controlled by 4-5 companies with an unassailable capital moat

This has been the situation for CPUs for decades. We now carry a 1980 cray super computer in our pockets.

>For me to understand this as an “optimistic” case, I need to understand why people believe that absent a need for human workers, there will be any incentive for the people who control all of the capital to keep people alive.

They won't need to engineer a Terminator style genocide of mankind. Man will kill each other in another war, like we always do. Biological imperatives mean we all kill each other until resources are abundant for those left standing. Then the winners of that war have a baby boom, their children are boomers for the next 80 years, and we start all over again.

The optimistic case says the robots are so freakin' good, they create the abundance for us without the need for the killing.

>Can someone in this thread who says “the kids must be wrong” give an actual optimistic case for AI?

The optimistic case is technological deflation. Where goods and services become so cheap, you don't need a lot of money to afford them. If you can have a robot sort packages like,

https://tech.yahoo.com/ai/articles/human-intern-beats-figure...

Why have a human do that? I don't think there's a person alive whose life goal is to sort packages. A human will lose a job, but only a job they accepted because the human needed money. Well if the package sorting drops the price of things, they don't need as much money. Now if every job is robotic, everything becomes cheaper to the point we don't need money for very many things at all.

That's the optimistic case.

This should be quite interesting to watch. It seems widely agreed that the "hands off" approach worked well with the internet. Only now after decades are some people trying to turn the screws with section 230 repeals, age verification, and all sorts of other onerous requirements on internet usage that were never needed before.

I wonder how badly these onerous requirements on AI will stunt its growth.

>I feel sorry for everyone who is solely operating at Level 1 and with nothing left to contribute.

Nah, you don't. You're doing that junior developer humblebrag thing. You have to prove how good you are with the hot new thing. "Look at me, I'm better at something than the gray beards."

AI is just a tool, and a commercial one at that. You're proud of your ability to use a tool, congratulations. But you're letting it go to your head. "All those level 1s are left behind! Haha!" It's a tool. I remember being told if I didn't learn Microsoft Word there would be no jobs for me in the white collar workplace. If you won't buy Microsoft "go be a dumb tradie" or something was the implication. Sound familiar? It does to me.

And trust me, all your pride in using this tool will not be enough. There will still be someone who claims to hold level 4 or level 5. "Oh, you're just an AI user? Haha, I feel sorry for such a level 3 loser! I'm training models and tuning hyper parameters on level 50!" Because that's what insecure people do. They constantly feel a need to prove themselves, because they never reached a state of acknowledgement by their peers. They want to be one of the greats, but have never been recognized as such.

Your laptop AI costs too much? Speculative investors can help!

I've only bought a phone from a carrier once. I guess that's common for android users, because there's a long tail of phones which are built for very specific tastes. US carriers don't really sell anything but Samsungs.

lol, I copied the first 4 paragraphs into gptzero and it confirms, 100% ai generated. Which makes this submission against HN guidelines...

I've looked into match group before, they're the usual suspects (Blackrock, Vanguard) and practice lawfare. If you don't take their buyout (like how bumble refused) then they try to sue you with software patents which I thought were all basically invalidated in Alice v. CLS Bank. But yeah, they're not a nice group of people who want to match you up. They're in it for money. And the way match group operates makes others reluctant to enter the market, unless they are just looking for a big buyout payday.

Dating apps don't have incentive to match you up. When they do, they lose a customer.

The most absurd thing is we are supposed to believe the people who did nothing about Epstein's clients are doing this to protect children.

It's the XY problem. The customers tell sales they want Y, rather than stating their problem X which they think Y will solve. Sales runs breathlessly to the dev team and demands we implement Y. Now scale this up to 10 customers or 100 customers. They all have the same X but come up with independent Ys.

You see the problem immediately. Sales/marketing didn't do their job sussing out what X is and wastes dev time with Ys. And worst of all, write once, support forever. Each one off Y has to be maintained for the special snowflake customer that uses it. None of the Ys actually work well for all the customers with problem X so you end up drowning in "technical debt" spent to create them all.

If your marketing department leads the company, I've discovered the best option is to just quit. Go find a job at an engineering company.

>fast compile

>rust

lol, thanks for the humor article of the day.

I can/have done this without AI and it tends to be disasterous. Management declares we need X fast. Okay, we can build that really fast, but it won't scale. Management says fine, just build it. We do. Management now wants to build Y fast. But wait, what about X? Nevermind, just build Y now. Okay, we're building Y, and X collapses... because it wasn't built to scale. Now we're being called in at 2 am to fix X while also expected to ship Y tomorrow. Sure, they'll glow you up and tell everyone what a hero you were for coming to the rescue at 2 am, but on that six month performance review, the blowup is used as reason to withhold raises and promotions. They don't lose any sleep of course, just you, the developer.