poisonborz

Congrats to creating something you think is valuable. Do you see a risk that your business model is taking away income from an API provider that you 100% depend on - meaning the plug could be pulled at any minute while you have paying customers?

The answer is almost always either "sales trick" or "slave labor".

I see these posts left and right but no one mentions the _actual_ thing developers are hired for, responsibility. You could use whatever tools to aid coding already, even copy paste from StackOverflow or take whole boilerplate projects from Github already. No AI will take responsibility for code or fix a burning issue that arises because of it. The amount of "responsibility takers" also increases linearly with the size of the codebase / amount of projects.

CEOs mostly just set direction, the workforce remains the same (sans mass-layoffs).

I wish there were some self-hosted setup that would replicate this based on either tags, bpm matching, or other similarity indicators snooped from online sites like lastfm.

Comments like this are not much worth without context. Each model has wildly different perf per each language and framework, project architecture (if it can be followed up successfully). No two devs on different projects have the same experience. Even insights like "Anthropic has a lead" is a broad generalization.

Cars require the least amount of public infra and can be run relatively cheaply, allow for free movement.

Contrast this with literally every other type of western public transport project going several times over budget, expensive to use and maintain and breaks down after a decade. I'm all for the idea, but that's the reality.

Despite this, cars will be the best - cheapest, fastest - means of transportation to most of the society until we have transparent crruptionless (AI?) governments. Apart a few cases - extreme distances (air), multimillion metro areas, handful of asian coutries due to culture - public transport is a mostly failed idea.

It is in the distant future still (if we ever get there without apocalypse first) but I think the goal was set out to be, from the very first bits of digital data, is to completely transition ourselves to a digital world. Living it in parallel will make less sense if Earth conditions get worse, and even less in space or on a hostile planet. In a digital world possibilities become limitless, disabilities, distances, shortcomings of the mind eliminated. Once you can't see a difference, will it matter if something is "real"? Sure, it can also become a hell and inhumane much easier, but this doesn't make it a less compelling dimension.

Looking through this lens, fighting, limiting internet usage is akin to moving to the rainforest to avoid capitalism - lone rebelling acts in the wrong direction of history, a temporary, partial victory for the few who dare this hassle.

Time is better spent to make this emerging space better, for everyone.

Rather than good I would say "same". Excellent text editor, very barebones for actual development work.

This "we, >smart< people will be able to >illegally< disable these artificial barriers, but those >old aged dumb people< will and should not" plan is not really a good setup for enforcing a "democratic" order. It is a much more authoritarian and naive approach, and a similar system is what led to the recent rise in social bubbles, conspiracy and fascism. For a more specific example, it made western society believe racism was a solved case since the 80s, because us, "smart people" controlled the mainstream discourse.

Absolute and true freedom of speech, with all its drawbacks and legal greyzones needs to exist.

The line of defense is not banning and silencing, people will get around that and you just make free advertisement. Will you fine or detain people reading banned opinions?

The actual defense is proper education and healthy, welcoming, accepting society. That is harder to make and maintain than banning IPs, the western world by and large cheaped out and stopped caring since the 80s.

Turn the sentence around with platforms like Reddit and see how ridiculous this sounds. Censorship will not defend democracy.

Rather subjective. I'm really happy with a used "16 gaming laptop, top performance, memory ssd extendable, extremely good display for ~1200€. Build quality is "ok" and creeks a bit, but magnitudes better value than a Thinkpad/Mac, even used ones.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety..."

Thats how you try to poach smart people and evoke a sense of empathy nowadays? It's not even very Microsoft, it's MAI. Who falls for this...

This is the main topic of Brave New World.

Stock market crash? I believe less and less a 1929 style crash is possible. Tesla, Uber, hell, look at GameStop still... The market is rigged. The US and the upper class needs numbers go up, the numbers will go up.

The only way an adjustment to such stock prices would come is if US power and dollar vanes. There is a chance now this will happen, but I guess it will still take a long time.

Huh, I think this is a problem that almost every HN reader solved in their life one way or other.

(Not speaking of the usability of this: if voice works for you, this can still be great for you, however)

This is a forum. Were BBSes social media platforms? We need better wording.

"Posting on Reddit requires running nonfree JavaScript code."

I have much respect for him but this is at the level of old-man-shouting-at. Criticism should be more targeted and not just rehashing the same arguments, even if true.

What is the HN ethos anyway? The "common thought" and average HNer was different in 2007, 2015, 2025, and will be again rather different in 2035.

One could say the "hacker ethics", love of freedom, tinkering goes beyond time, but this falls apart at any topic beyond that.

The problem is genuinely the misleading nature of the phrase "end to end" and the lack of a better alternative. HTTPS is "end to end". There should be some new word for "decryptable only by the user".

They were solid top in quality for 15 years for Android. DeX, pen features, camera software was solid. OneUI became very customizeable. But it was stably boring at best, and atrocious at worst, and they couldn't ship any other standout feature that wasn't scrapped soon after.

Now they shipped the same camera on their most sold flagship phone 3 years in a row, same battery size for 5 years. Flip-flopping between Qualcomm CPUs as their own couldn't compete after years of trying. They don't deserve the spot they have for quite some time now.

Android: You can get the message db with root. You can export individual chats in text version right from the interface. The message media is stored in the user folders.

Still bad, sure, but there are worse offenders.

Anecdotal. Why wouldn't they deliver these via Play Services update? It's easy to dismiss an OS upgrade, background updates can't be really blocked.

Religion and tradition, the two things that elevated humanity, yet also been the source of much of its suffering.

My fear is that even for consumer apps, MCP (or successor) will outgrow UIs, becoming the only way to interact with an app or certain feature - placing machines wholly in the center instead of humans. Human software should retain the understandability and atomicity of each step taken.

This seems like a niche issue, running Docker in LXC for years with dozens of images without a problem.

You confuse open source with free software, and all the shades of it.

GPL/copyleft exist because some people make products because they want to help and improve a community. Not just to let the product go in the wind, "whatever happens to it" (meaning corporations using it for profit extraction and/or the exact opposite goals). Even if AI made this less defendable by legal means.

This isn't because these people are "control freaks", but because of their beliefs and purposefully chosen legal framework.