rixed

Why is it so easy to be a pessimist though? I believe in the 50s and 60s it was easy to be an optimist. Why is that?

That's the point, in the beginning there were not supposed to be native apps, just web apps, some of them advertised in Apple site but not otherwise privileged.

Sure, the need to self defense against US dangerous neighbors. Looking at you, Canada!

Actually, from 2007 (first iPhone) to 2008 (the App Store), they kind of did.

Instead of a separate federated network for a single app, why not implement the app on top of a pre-existing federated network, so that nobody has to create yet another account? Like, on top of atproto or activitypods or...?

So, like pic?

tanks getting closer.

Planned obsolescence.

Exactly my opinion too.

Apps will become barely visible data providers. Some will provide specialized widgets for those cases where a specialized UI is needed. And data will be designed to inter operate.

I have reached this conclusion from a specific example I'm working on, more details in this blog post if you pardon a link to a website of mine: https://cloudywithachanceoflatency.net/blog_02-how-llm-accel...

Indeed, I'd read the post too quick, have been annoyed lately by the many front-page poges that seemed either trivial or not related to tech, and assumed it was the same. Now I did read it properly, and I reckon the feeling is well rendered and it does not feel that much out of place.

Well, hope the author will post a follow up in a month or two titled "how I eventually found joy again coding with an AI assistant".

How did you manage to keep being aware of it all day? In my experience that's nearly impossible.

Why is that on HN at all?

<meta> A large share about this HN forum is about Snowden the man. Was he right? Is he a spy? Is he more free in Russia than he would have been in jail? etc.

Contrast that with the article, a long and well documented piece about journalism and the files themselves, with not a single line about Snowden the man.

That reminds me about how hard it was, 10 years ago, to speak about the actual events depicted in the Wikileaked files, in all the deluge about Chelsea Manning and/or Assange.

Part of it is certainly due to our human nature: we love to discuss people, facts or ideas not so much. But one has to wonder: what if it were just a diversion technique?

We will never know; But what we do know is that one should never feed the trolls.

It's certainly a good idea to train a neural network to find good query plans but... an LLM??

I believe the important part was "on the server".

I stand corrected, and I'm glad i was wrong.

"Freedom" is a valuable concept but a poor model for understanding behavior. I'd support that if there were no business incentive to spend money and research to influence people into taking the wrong decisions.

Since the dawn of industry, people have been amazed by the new possibilities and how that would affect society once it's evenly distributed. Technical progress has been going on, percolating in every places and down to every person. Yet it's never been "evenly distributed".

What would happen when every one would have access to Internet? How different will the world be when everyone carries a computer in their pocket? Can communicate with anyone regardless of location and language, with no intermediary? Those were questions we used to ask ourselves not so long ago. Turned out: not much have changed.

For the future to be evenly distributed, much bigger changes will have to happen than large scale manufacture of efficient GPUs. Otherwise, tech will just be used to make sure progress and knowledge stays unevently distributed. That's the whole game of herding humans, after all; It's called "organized scarcity".

Yes sorry, fixed. Thanks!

Another site tricking users willing to look at the code into starring the repo instead.

How desperate do you need to be to resort to this?

Did you write more about that experience somewhere?

This seems to corroborate my feeling that aptitude with language is a very poor proxy for intelligence, although it's often used as one. My own experience is that I'm less struggling to find the right words and sounds more clever at the times when my brain is actually empty and I'm "not there", and at the contrary the more "self-aware" I am and the more I struggle to articulate my thoughts, as if my brain (or ego?) was stepping in the way and slowing me down by trying to supervise what I'm saying too closely, making me sounds dumb.

The issue is not that Linux lacks a central authority that holds some encryption keys and controls what software you can run. The issue is that you should not run any software from a source that can't be trusted. When we used to run only software from community distros or that we compile ourselves, launching a malicious program was a non issue.

Interesting, thank you. Are you aware of any quantitative data to back up the claim that llms are more performant in code mode than mcp mode? Not that i doubt it, but I'm curious about how big of a difference it can make.

What do you mean "as code mode"?

Very few "user facing" applications will have to deal with real users any longer. From an author's point of view let's admit that it will make things easier.

Companies do not promote anyone. People do. For all kinds of reason that are more personal/politics as the organization gets larger.

The use case they have in mind may be screenshots triggered by another app, not by the user.

If you find this interesting, don't wait for a random blogpost to appear by chance on HN, go read some manage today!

Something I've read on HN once, and that nailed it for me: in the middle of the Pacific you are further away from any possible rescue than if you were on the ISS.

  > culturally, you might be almost embarrassed to offer your seat 

Haha exactly, but what's worse: the old person might think "damn! Another kid who believe I'm too old to stand up. Let's pretend I'm thankful to not embarrass him " :)