pizzathyme

I would encourage people to test this out for themselves, I think you will find a different result. People today are starved for in-person connection, but are afraid to initiate the conversation.

This doesn't come naturally to me, but after working on it over a few years, 95% of the time strangers are excited to chat and say hi and make a friend.

Speaking as someone who worked for the SF bay area's largest homeless shelter nonprofit:

People who end up homeless long-term usually have negative social behaviors that push others away. When you help them, they don't tell an interesting story, they act angry or yell at you. When you give them money, they don't make you feel you happy, they make you feel afraid or annoyed.

This is unfortunately often due to mental health issues or drug problems. It's very sad, and ends up completely isolating them from all friends, family, and strangers who could help them.

Edit: This article actually puts this into clear terms, long term homeless people are poor "kindees"

Ideally this friction should be viewed as a normal part of career growth. You will have expanded your expertise and are now capable of harder problems and roles, with more compensation in return.

The typical moves are: [1] Negotiate for more title, compensation at your current role (good outcome) [2] Leave for a better role (a good outcome) [3] Stay, no change, doing more work for the same money (not recommended)

The very first example, which is held up as an error, is actually arguably correct. If you asked a human (me) how many bananas were purchased, they clearly purchased one banana.

Yes the banana weighs 0.4 pounds. But the question was not to return the weight or the quantity, the question was to return the quantity.

It seems like more instructions are needed in the prompt that the author is not even aware of.

Yes and - it would be great to hover/tap to see the original headline.

I found myself pulling up the original and the honest versions side by side. The translation makes it funny.

They did mean you, they just meant "imagine" very literally!

Same question and great work. I would love to know the prompt details of how the hacker news truth was captured

I can understand the current global/political environment against mRNA accounting for a 90% fall in revenues and valuation. But if the mRNA tech is still progressing and promising for a variety of ailments like cancer, then the company still has substantial future value coming

One thing not mentioned in the article I expected: Does this invite more/less harmful UV radiation? Does it change overall temperature projections?

Ads get a bad wrap, but no one wants a bad ad. The user wishes they didn't have to see it. The platform wishes they hadn't shown it to you. The advertiser/company wishes they hadn't paid to show it to you.

In contrast, a "good" ad is just a recommendation for something you haven't heard of, but you love and are glad you were told about it. There are tons of products and services out there you haven't heard of.

People might not believe this, think that if they would really love it, they would have searched for it, found it through organic means, etc. But if that were true, these companies wouldn't be bringing in $100B+ each, and generating $1T+ spend each

How does this square with the video where they showed it running continuously for an hour doing an actual Amazon package sorting job? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkc2y0yb89U

I believe they are shooting for $20k. If (big if) they can actually get it to complete chores in some reasonable amount of time, there would be a market with families that currently employ house workers. Small market but similar play to the original Tesla being high end.

From there, it's a question of could they bring costs down.

A shocking statistic is that YTD, 1/6th of the 2% rise in US GDP this year is attributable to AI Datacenters alone.

Source: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2025/08/18/h...

So I think if there was an AI crash, US economy goes with it in the short term

A sad realization I had:

- Well-run companies prioritize against a bell curve of core customers vs long tail customers

- Today, many of us are inside that curve. Products are made intuitive to us

- But many people (elderly) are not in the middle of that bell curve

And the kicker:

- One day, all of us will move out of that bell curve. Therefore, many products will suddenly become maddeningly frustrating to understand, at once

What's the solution? There's definitely a market opportunity for the long tail customers. But, it's tough to build a smartphone for a (relatively) smaller market. Maybe that's a startup opportunity

hs-CRP is the specific biomarker

Like them or not, EA has been a major force in gaming for over 40 years (I used to work there). They invented the term "Game Producer". Their early vision for promoting Game Designers like hollywood Directors was ahead of its time. They have a hallway lined with gold discs of million seller hit games. They basically created the casual gaming industry (The Sims Division, Pogo, Casual Divisions) in a time when games were mostly marketed to boys.

I respect this company a lot, even though they always seem to do things that embitter the gaming community against them.

Unfortunately these types of buyouts usually come with layoffs, after a year of tough layoffs in games. I hope anyone who will be affected can land somewhere safe.

The campus has a labyrinth with a plaque that's always inspired me: "As in life, the walls are only in your mind."

Agree. But my understanding is the main idea is Mars is supposed to be a "backup" for humanity in the event of a very-low-probability catastrophic event on earth (total nuclear war, solar flare, meteorite collision).

In our lifetimes, unlikely. Over the next 1 million years? Maybe.

Interestingly every Famicom and Nintendo Entertainment System in the 1980's shipped with modem capability. Hiroshi Yamauchi the CEO thought the Nintendo Network could be a big play. It never panned out but it was a proprietary pre-internet dial up system.

I read about this in "Game Over" by David Sheff, but here's another source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Computer_Network_System

Refining. China has build up the entire pipeline from mining to raw ore to refining for industry use. It's the only place that has it all. Building the refining capacity took decades.

An alternative would be:

+ Yes, allowing people to have a celebration goodbye party before they go

+ Allowing for medically assisted dying on a person's own terms

+ More open conversations about: directives, how people would like to be treated when they near death, wills, inheritances, funerals. These are all taboo topics

+ A natural part of life

I'm so sorry for your loss. I agree with what you say about "disordered", the language is hostile.

In a less morbid area, I feel the same way about ADHD - "attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder". For some people this is problematic, but others can function fine and happily with this.

In those cases, why is it a "disorder"? Why can't it just be "how some people are"?

Unless you are a hermit, everyone has a network, even if it's small. Everyone has a few friends, a brother/sister/dad/mom/cousin, a few people in their town they know. All of those people know someone else, and that's your initial pool of job opportunities to look at.

This might not get you into your dream company. But it can get you a next job to grow from.

For one of my jobs I had no contacts in the industry so I emailed someone at the company who went to my school, mentioned we both went there, and could they meet for coffee. I then drove 2 hours to meet him. We discussed what was happening at his company, are there opportunities, and he referred me.

No form is going to extend a job offer autonomously. At some point in the chain, there will be a boss, a person, who talks to you and thinks, "I want to work with this person", and decides to make the offer.

So the goal is to figure out how to get in touch with that hiring manager as the first step. Even if the form or HR "rejects" you, this person can step in say, "that's silly, I want to work with them. Send them through"

I think this charade of sending in resumes to forms is causing people so much pain. It feels like rejection and is not moving them closer to a job.

If you just graduated college or have no network, you can reach out to alumni and mention that connection. Or, you can ask personal friends/family for contacts (will probably be local companies, which may be a first step job).

Or you can reach out over social media. "Hi there, I follow you on X and am just getting started in the industry. Do you mind if I ask a few research questions?" A friend of mine just used this technique to land a role in an industry where he had no contacts.

If the situation is "good luck getting through to people on the phone", then that probably means this person is not a real friend of yours, they are a stranger, and you shouldn't try. You should be reaching out to people who actually know your name, or you have a mutual friend.

There is something fundamentally broken about this entire user journey and industry. There are lots of jobs to fill. But hiring managers don't find people reading through resumes submitted in a form. People don't get jobs by submitting resumes into a form.

The opportunities happen from talking on the phone, meeting someone for coffee. I feel like this entire resume submission industry should just be deleted.

> "You’ve spent several months sending out scores of carefully tailored resumes and cover letters for jobs you know you are fully qualified for and would excel at."

People should not do this. It is causing so much suffering. In my 6 jobs in my career from college internship to startups to Big Tech, I have never gotten a job from sending an application into a site. It's always been through (somehow) tracking down a person to speak to over phone or coffee, and get a referral.

A form is not going to a hire you, a person is. You need to ignore the form and talk to a person.

I wish I could put this on a billboard everywhere. It seems like many people are suffering from thousands of applications, and it makes me sad.

There's a lot of parallels here to the history of Nikola Tesla vs. Marconi. Tesla's inventions were superior, more reliable, more versatile in almost every way. But Marconi is the one remembered as the father of the radio, despite stealing Tesla's ideas and implementing them in less reliable fashion. He got to market fast, iterated on horrible versions, built broken products, but he shipped shipped shipped. And in the market, Tesla faded away, and Marconi won.

I say this as a big Elon skeptic. Technical superiority is only a small piece of the puzzle. But 10 years from now, I would be very surprised if the SOTA tech you mention has a fraction as many users as Neuralink.

This is exactly the type of company that I like to see: - Sounds very complicated/thorny to navigate (regulatory, medical, compliance) - Not super "sexy", which keeps competition lower - Clear pain points (fines) for customers that can and are willing to pay (hospitals)

Next up is just great execution by you all!

That list of logos you all have - are those paying customers today?

Best of luck!

I worked on The Sims. From experience I can tell you these types of games require a ton of experimentation and building before you finally hit on something that feels "fun" and you get lost in playing it. Then it all kind of comes together at once.

Keep it up! Looking forward to what you figure out.

Exactly. Unpopular take: I don't understand how the "fundamental flaw" is just the author's opinion that it's "not sustainable". Asian companies have sustained 60+ hour workweeks with high-skilled tech workers for decades.

It's not fun. I don't want to do it. I don't support it. But it is one way to run a company.