piva00

Without loudly complaining there is absolutely no change. Shutting up has never improved anything.

Why would the only solution be "figure out how to make more money"? There are many professions where it isn't even possible to figure that out, should all of them just shut up and move? It's great you were able to go live somewhere else, for some it would be devastating to lose their sense of belonging, other people have different priorities for what they consider a happy life.

Sorry but I think it's even less conducive to anything to tell people to shut up, it's an easy cop out, a way to invert the blame while being thoroughly unhelpful.

> Between 2008 and the early 2010s, Hanania wrote for alt-right and white supremacist publications under the pseudonym Richard Hoste.

> Hanania was a contributor to Project 2025 regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices. His advocacy against DEI has been influential among Republican and conservative policy-makers in the United States, and Vox called him "the man whose tweets helped kill DEI".

> In a 2023 essay, Hanania wrote that the only way to reduce crime is "a revolution in our culture or form of government. We need more policing, incarceration, and surveillance of black people. Blacks won't appreciate it, whites don't have the stomach for it."

Interesting you mention human rights, the author seems to not care much about that issue.

Unions as you describe (mandatory membership for employment) is not the only way for unions to exist; in the Nordics unions are a core component of the labour market, and there are no jobs where union membership is required, it's all voluntary.

What exactly about unions, outside of the USA, in countries like Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, that trample human rights?

Still very few for deserving a tax break based on potential employment opportunities. A DC simply doesn't help the local economy, it's very often a net-negative: it's very resource-intensive while not generating much in terms of economical activity for where it sits at.

In a sense it's purely extractivist consuming land, water, and energy without benefits to the community.

Definitely not because of long-term employment, even very large DCs only employ about a hundred staff on-site.

I specifically said "I gladly pay it", it's not the threat of imprisonment which compels me to pay my taxes. Instead it's all the benefits I see from my taxes around me: education, transportation, public amenities, healthcare, so on and so forth. Each aspect being taken care of improves society, the holistic whole is larger than the sum of its parts, there is synergy when your population is educated, don't need to spend lots in transportation, lives in great well-taken care of urban environments, can access well-maintained public parks, pools, sports facilities, don't need to be afraid of getting sick, etc.

I do actually also spend my own money in monthly charitable donations, including the UNICEF. I think it's a basic prerogative that when you make enough money for living comfortably you should also find charities you trust and support them.

> getting the money forcefully taken from you and being told that it's totally going to the kids/healtchare, while 50% of it gets burned up by government beurocrats?

You don't even know where I live to be able to say what percentage is burnt or spent in bureaucracy. It's unfortunate your view of government seems to be based on an inefficient and ineffective one, perhaps it's your experience (and it's my experience in my home country) but by being blindly ideological about it without ever experiencing a somewhat functioning government you are missing out.

I discovered the pendulum of social movements after reading Bertrand Russell's "The Ancestry of Fascism" at a relative young age (~16 years old), it only really made sense after my 30s though.

It required me watching, experiencing how things I had considered settled and humanity was over them started to turn back: the rise of fascistic tendencies in different societies, anti-intellectualism, etc. things that as a teenager/young adult I never considered could become societal issues again.

> How much of your money do you spend on paying for kids school lunches, paying medical bills of terminally ill kids and paying off the student loans of graduates?

At least in the society I live all of those are partially paid by me through taxes.

I'm very glad to do it since the existence of kids school lunches, free healthcare (including for the terminally ill), and free universities make my life much better since society as a whole is better off. Even as an immigrant which did not use any of those services, I'm glad to do my part to pay for them, it's just the cost of a good society.

The fine is not a one-and-done like fines are levied against corporations in the USA, most fines against corporations in the EU can be levied many times if the infringing behaviour is not corrected.

> Right, and we haven’t because we just don’t wanna?

We have, they get bought by American companies as their exit strategy.

If American companies decide to shutdown access then there's no pressure from the behemoths to stamp out competition, it would just be natural that alternatives take over since the market clearly exists and without American tech companies filling that market it would be pretty easy for alternatives to grow.

So no country can ever take action and enforce their local laws because the USA can retaliate?

Why have local laws in that case? Better we all just adopt American laws to not have to fear the Americans getting pissy when they diverge...

AOL used to be a US$ 200B public company, it was acquired by 4.4B.

Sun, Lucent, Yahoo all had massive valuations at their peak but eventually dwindled and got acquired.

It's always possible for a massively valued company to stumble, fall, and become a husk of what it once was. I don't think Google/Alphabet is immune to this even though their absurd cash cow from ads make it very unlikely at this exact moment.

> Basically what I'm saying is that if datacenters with the closest thing you'll ever see to infinite piles of cash can't expand the grid then we're in for a very rough time.

Isn't the problem that the grid operators/generators have been asking for them to commit part of this huge pile of cash before they start the expensive buildout process but the DCs are refusing to do so?

I don't think it says anything about having a rough time, the grid would expand if those requesting major expansions would commit paying for them. Instead the grid is being told "we need it, build it, and we will pay after" which for the kind of massive investment necessary to push extra dozens of GW is absurdly risky. If the grid starts major expansion and AI investments crumbles in 3-5 years then it's both a waste of resources while also requiring grid operators to charge more the current consumers to bridge the gap left by the AI DCs.

The only thing I can see showing a very rough time is the entitlement of these companies, just because they are surfing a humongous phase of investments they feel they don't need to play by the rules that always existed: if you need something massive you gotta pay for it.

[flagged]

They could do it, some people would align with that stance, and some wouldn't. Exactly how it plays out being a customer: now we've discovered he supports a far-right party here in Sweden, I can choose to not support the CEO with my money and let others know about their political leaning to decide by themselves if they want to support him and his business aware that their money might got to far-right parties.

I don't see any issue with your flipped argument, it's the same thing, no?

It's always been the strategy for VC-funded companies: undercut pricing for as long as possible to achieve market dominance, slowly turn the price knob up to become profitable.

Always funny to read the tirades against subsidies here on HN, sometimes even the same users praising how much more capital exist in SV/USA for risky ventures (compared to the EU and other markets) will also complain about how China is undercutting competition with subsidies, without ever batting an eye to the fact the exuberant privilege the USA holds in capital markets is exactly what makes it possible for private investors to subsidise loss-making ventures for years to decades in the USA until the company becomes profitable.

It doesn't change that fact, unfortunately it's a complex societal issue which presents quite heavily in your society, it requires decades of constant improvement to change anything.

I don't think American society has the appetite nor patience for the actions needed for this kind of change.

> Countries could try what essentially amounts to unilateral sanctions on the US to try and force sharing, but it's unlikely it would go well.

Many unlikely things happened the past 18 months in geopolitical terms, it was unlikely that Denmark would have to ready troops to send to Greenland to fend off American aggression but here we are.

Whatever was unlikely on the previous world order is up in the air now, no one knows how the USA breaking its alliances will shape the future world in 10-20 years. It turned out that it's also unlikely things will go well with the previous status quo, realignments are bound to happen.

> 2) Money needs to support that. Which means for Math, the money for math teachers needs to be competitive with research departments of banks, and very different for different subjects, which seems offensive to schools and government in general. If teaching positions aren't competing with other professional careers in the subject matter, it will never work. This will, of course, mean that many science teachers make more than a school principal and even a district administrator. Deal with it.

I believe this to be a heavily US-centric view, Estonia and Finland do not pay more for math teachers than they could get in banks' research departments but still manage to get competent teaching across most school subjects.

Things work outside of the US, the issue is the US does not want to look outside and adapt itself to incorporate what's been learnt from other systems. It's a "do the US way or no way" attitude, and it's slowly eroding to become more a "no way" than any kind of "US way" of doing things.

10ms of buffer is almost 512 samples @ 48kHz, it's quite a lot of buffer in audio terms!

Investment in education is one of the best ROI a society can have. Quite surprising that in the USA this relationship has been eroded by schools spending in sports and admin, in most other developed countries it's a quite direct relationship between more investments -> better educational outcomes.

US$ 20/month for a SysEx librarian backup? Or US$ 599 for a "lifetime" license of a solution that mostly depends on this company existing to keep the precious backups?

That's more money than a fully fleshed out DAW like Ableton Live, Bitwig, Logic, etc.

> Every vintage synthesizer is a ticking time bomb. The soldered internal battery will die, erasing every custom patch you have ever made. Secure your irreplaceable sounds before your hardware turns silent.

The marketing copy is also really obnoxious to try to sell this solution. Yeah, induce fear to try to convince someone to pay a quite hefty amount of money for saving vintage synths patches.

I really don't understand the direction of this product, and I'm very much its audience/market...

If we want to keep tracing the lineage of AI we'll have to go all the way back to Markov chains from the 70s.

You said LLMs were designed for images which is absolutely incorrect.

What?

LLMs were designed for text, it's in their name "large language model". Only with specialised encoders like vision transformers they were able to process images as well but you're absolutely wrong about the original design intent.

In the end you just added misinformation, just save the comment to your favourites and set a reminder to check it again in a few years like you wanted.

You can save it to your favourites, no need to comment at all if it's not going to add to the conversation.

> How much biological material would that be?

Much less than bacteria and other micro-organisms that are dying all the time :) humans are ~0.01% of Earth's biomass, bacteria are about 15% and they have quite short lifespans in comparison.

Why is the ethical line specifically on model distillation for you?

Was it ethical for Anthropic/OpenAI to train their models by gobbling a treasure trove of copyrighted material?

What is comparable to Hetzner in price/scale/features?

> If I may ask you and others, I assume that you are at a relatively decent position within your company and have somewhat say in it. Why aren't employees more honest about AI and concerns regarding it?

We've tried it where I work at. People put effort to compile studies, to collect testimonials, catalog and organise the strengths and weaknesses based on engineers' experiences with the tooling.

The result was the person driving this effort getting asked by HR, their manager, and their skip manager to stop with the anti-AI rhetoric, that AI is the future of the industry and if not rolled out in this way we will be left behind.

> I'd imagine that people must chalk it up as saying that there is push from investor side into using AI and management is forcing it but couldn't more effort be also redirected towards the fact that agents are still finnicky sometimes and that the sustainability of projects moving forward is going to be a major issue to investors given that they want sustainable growth.

The C-level doesn't seem to care, they believe to be in an existential risk where any price paid to rollout these tools as wide and broadly as possible across the whole org is small compared to being left behind.

It's all fueled by executives and investors anxieties, there's very little left for reason when fear takes over.

Same here, I think the tool is fantastic, it has helped me in lots of way professionally and for hobby projects involving skills I'm not experienced with but I'm absolutely exhausted.

The worst part is that I'm not exhausted from my work, I've been through a heavy burnout before and had to adapt my ways of working to not fall into that kind of exhaustion again. This is different, it's not a pressure to deliver anything specifically, no stupid deadlines, it's so much more vague than any other kind of work pressure I've been through in the past 20+ years that it makes it much harder to find ways to keep my head straight.

It's exhausting to be reviewing boatloads of PRs of very varied quality. I have relegated myself to block merges at the first sign of a bad/weird design instead of trying to understand why it might have needed a compromise in the design, many times people couldn't even explain to me why something was written the way it was... After many "it was Claude that decided this way" it became so tiring that I don't even ask anymore, I just leave a comment on the first blocker I find and reject the PR. If people are not putting any effort to review it before throwing it at me I will just return the favour.

I think we ought to separate hobbies from consumerist/collectionism behaviours.

At least to me they are very different activities. Better is quite subjective though, again to me there's something better in hobbies that develop skills vs consumerist obsessions.