whatisthiseven

It doesn't matter the country. When any country is accused of hacking its always "how do you know, it can all be faked, its a flase flag". It's weird deflections and pretending hacking is a ghostly nightmare done by geniuses never seen by the light of day. The reality is so much more humble: it's a desk job done by above average workers with a couple smart ones captured by nation states. They make mistakes and thus can be tracked. But nope, each time every discussion has to rehash a sophomoric discussion on the nature of truth and knowledge.

Unless it's the US as hacker. Then no one is inpressed.

Do you have any papers or studies showing it can reduce transmission of any disease? Covid lives in the throat and lungs so I am not sure how a mouth rinse could do anything. Similarly for many other common colds and the flu.

So after your basic premise was demonstrated false, you instead just deflect to a nothing statement that couldn't be more false? "Apple is good" "no, they aren't" "for every bad app Apple let's on the platform that makes them extremely rich that they will never ban, and all the spam apps they seem un able to ban, there are definitely way more malware on the play store because Google lets people do whatever"

Which is just not true. It has permissions, app review, and the same broken financial incentives as Apple.

I don't understand how anyone defends Apple's walled thornbush garden. Sure it's in neat rows with paths and it says it's a garden. But it's designed to maximize the amount it gets out of you for Apple's benefit just like Google, to make sure you can't leave, and to make you feel like the thornbush garden of Google is worse because they use gravel for their paths instead of paved stones.

The less known half of that saying just never really got the viral spread as that first one.

"And that's why they're everywhere"!

"I thought people on a website called _hacker_ news would be supportive of a ruling allowing small app creators alternative payment system? "

This is also ycombinator, and thus hacker culture is an means to be exploited by investors who are looking to grow unicorns. Such investors won't tolerate any restrictions on their path to growth as it threatens their entire value proposition.

So, we arrive at the natural conclusion: hackernews is only partially aware of its own narrative dissonance. This is how topics like this one can have hackers rooting for underdogs that will never get a meaningful win out of Apple. While others cheer on Apple and defend its practices as they see themselves temporarily embarrassed founders of the next trillion dollar company and they can't have any roadblocks to that growth.

And then there are some unaffiliated with either hacker or founder culture and their opinions on this topic are naturally as varied as anyone else's.

I'm also ok with mega corps not buying smaller companies. It encourages further mega-corpification.

I think it's fine if no one starts vampiric companies that dump free services on the public destroying the perceived value of software for the purpose of a fast unicorn exit. Of course, these companies always look to advertising for funding so they are obtrusive.

Unless you are thinking of real companies that would be affected by this ban? Retail stores don't care about this ban. Companies that sell real products wouldn't care. If they sell real software services and plan to turn a positive profit rather than exit this wouldn't impact anyone other than unicorn chasers, which are bad for everyone.

Software salaries have been higher than hardware salaries since well before covid. So that part of your theory is bunk.

Had it occurred to you some people repeat stuff because they just want other people to believe the things they think? That's kind of how discussion works. It isn't a measure of truth to see the same line repeated at all. That's a fallacy.

Yea, I'd imagine comparing a 9 year old version of a language to another would be "mind melting". And you are comparing to Java 8, from before Java re-organized their JEP process to ship features far faster, with a different release philosophy and feature roadmap.

Kotlin is worth picking up, but after seeing the speed at which Kotlin moves compared to how Java moves now, I don't think Kotlin will keep up long term.

That's weird, as my understanding of the YT creator community is constant strife, ever changing rules, arbitrary bans, strikes on their account for vaguely matching copyrighted work, and most recently swearing too much, or too early, in a video.

YT is not friendly to creators, for the same reason Twitch is not friendly to creators: advertisers hate what people want to watch.

Even Patreon, where people pay rather than watch ads, repeatedly runs into issues with creators because of pay schedules, amounts, percent cuts, platform features, and more.

If its someone else's platform, creators don't win.

Faces are definitely harder.

The story has to get stretched a lot to imagine a total dystopia, but its possible.

People like digital mirrors for all their benefits: lighter, more features, music and weather all on one "mirror". You can have voice chats, see how you might look with various makeup/styles/haircuts. This digital mirror gets so popular, and (undermining myself here a bit) high enough quality, that people want these new cool wall screens instead.

And you betcha, AI is of course going to be added. Take insta pics without needing to hold a phone, then apply filters all in one with your voice! Some people take dozens of photos, forgetting briefly how they look.

Now, people are used to every day seeing themselves in the digital mirror with minor touchups for how they would look if they used some sponsored makeup. They used to do it daily so it would match, but kept forgetting as it always showed the improved version (with a small icon saying, you are 40% matched to the predicted image!).

Some 20-something walking around in Chicago passes The Bean, and realizes they don't look quite the same as they did in their home mirror. They take out their phone to take a pic of themselves, which is of course synced to their mirror with the same "makeup enhancement suggestions", still warning them it doesn't match.

They put away their phone, confident in the knowledge The Bean is just a dirty and distorted mirror, which is why they don't look as good. The camera has always been trustworthy. Why doubt it today?

(again, fun story, I don't think this is likely. Just plausible for some people).

True, its just a fun story. This reddit post makes it clear, though, that while people will review the images carefully, they may still not be able to accurately determine differences.

Just take the story above with one more minor step: You snap a pic of the park, briefly glanced at it to make sure it wasn't blurry (which the AI would have fixed anyway) or had an ugly glare (it did, the AI fixed it) or worse a finger (the AI also fixed that).

You're satisfied the image was captured faithfully and you did a good job holding your plastic rectangle to capture unseen sights. You didn't look closely enough to notice all the faked details, because they were so good.

This fake moon super enhance? It already proves people will fall for it. I could easily see people not realizing AI turned the flowers in the picture more red, or the grass just a little too green, etc.

Imagine this future:

Sensor quality in phones goes down, AI makes up for it because good sensors are expensive, but compute time in the cloud on Samsung owned servers is cheap. You take a picture on a crappy camera, and Samsung uses AI to "fix" everything. It knows what stop signs, roadways, busses, cars, stop lights, and more should look like, and so it just uses AI to replace all the textures.

Samsung sells what's on the image to advertisers and more with the hallucinated data. People can't tell the difference and don't know. They "just want a good looking picture". People further use AI to alter images for virtual likes on Tiktok and Insta.

This faked data, submitted by users as "real pics in real places" is further used to train AI models that all seem to think objects further away have greater detail, clarity, and cleanliness than they should.

You look at a picture of a park you took, years before, and could have sworn the flowers were more pink, and not as red. You are assured, by your friend who knows it all, that people's memories are fallible; hallucinating details, colors, objects, sizes, and more. The image, your friend assures you further? "Advanced tech captured its pure form perfectly".

And thus, everyone will demand more clarity, precision, details, and color where their eyes don't remember seeing.

I can't remember ever seeing those notifications? I must have turned them off years ago.

Super 8 was co-produced by Steven Spielberg, which is probably why the mystery part of Super 8 is cohesive and interesting.

The website's design is great and simple with no explanation needed of how to use it. Would be snappier if it matched on words automatically so I wouldn't need to press enter.

I noticed with my own writing the use of lazy structures, such as too many adverbs, very, "statement, but concession" sentences, or parenthesis for tangents.

It isn't that these things are always bad. It was only when reading my older works I realized how much I was over-using these that it made my writing as a whole worse. My way of thinking about things, imagery for scenes, everything was getting impacted by the constant use of those sentence structures. Your thoughts can't help but be impacted if you're upping the "impact" of each emotion, phrase, description to be "very" or "lovely purple".

Its OK for descriptions to stand on their own, and the same is true for simple words. A blue coat, the sad man, the lone frog in a pond in the rain.

Write different; you'll be surprised how much you think different, too.

I worked on a CPU in Minecraft years ago and designed it to be a 7-bit CPU. I chose that number because it gave me the an appreciable number of operations plus space for arguments. I had only 6 bytes of RAM and about 32bytes of ROM. The ROM was just a circle of transparent blocks (zero) and solid blocks (one) pushed around by pistons.

The whole thing was real slow, but it was so much fun trying to design something that would perform interesting calculations. I stopped working on it as at the time Minecraft had some odd bugs with pistons that would cause non-deterministic behavior.

I think the most challenging aspect wasn't the programming or circuits, which were well understood and mapped out, but trying to create modules I could copy-paste inside a special Minecraft save editor to make the machine quickly, then manually dragging out data/command lines to hook the modules together.

I sat alongside customer service agents working phones, email, and chat. They use copy-pasted stuff for everything. I will watch them search word for a template way slower than I could type, but that's their process.

Re-used phrases is not a sign of a bot, IMO. But it is a sign of employees who have to respond to the same thing over and over and don't have much power to effect change.

Honestly I dislike TC because he rambles and is too verbose. I don't know why he has recommended so much here.

Yea, because the US population is aging rapidly past 60, when most cancers start to form.

Your premise could easily be explained by "the percentage of the American population over 60 has increased steadily."

See: https://www.statista.com/statistics/457822/share-of-old-age-...

So yea, more total cancers diagnosed, cause old people get cancer.

That link just shows all cancer. If you start here: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/lung/statistics/index.htm Then click the graph on the right, you can see the trend line for LUNG cancer specifically.

Spoilers: the per capita lung cancer incidence is going down for all of the 21st century. It is actually improving faster the most recent decade than the previous. What has changed is the total number of new lung cancer cases is slightly increasing.

This is easily explained by an increasingly elderly population, which makes up over 80% of lung cancer sufferers: https://www.lung.org/lung-health-diseases/lung-disease-looku...

Could you give examples of any kind? At the end you say "for whatever that is worth", but its worthiness is low given there are no specifics and I don't know you.

"The goal of a lot of the people here seems to be hysteria. "

Hadn't you just accused others of mischaracterizing your views? Why are you doing the same to everyone arguing back?

I don't see anyone in this comment chain whose goal is to be hysterical or cause hysteria. We all simply view human caused climate change as obvious and want to solve it. I am quite curious as to how to solve climate change economically, quickly, without giving up too much way of life, liberties, or causing panic.

The public is not being hysterical. Rather the opposite, which is something you already admitted further up: people simply aren't acting at all.

"You'd think if this was seriously catastrophic, we'd be going in to debt to finance better energy solutions."

I suppose I could see this as saying "if it really were catastrophic, why aren't we acting like it" as opposed to "it can't be catastrophic if we aren't acting like it".

A subtle difference, but to say it is a "deliberate mischaracterization" is just not true. I read the whole comment chain and I think my initial view was an easy one to arrive at. I would avoid conflating too many things at once.

"yet somehow congress manages to find money for inanities to the tune of billions every year. You'd think if this was seriously catastrophic, we'd be going in to debt to finance better energy solutions."

I don't understand. The people in the US Congress are hamstringing themselves and can barely pass their own legislation, yet somehow that inaction and political gridlock, which existed and will exist regardless of climate change, is somehow proof that...climate change isn't as bad?

You know who else also has a ton of money and a willingness to be dishonest? Every company that produces or relies directly on coal, oil, and gas. They ensure Congress is useless and unable to act by funding a party that ensures nothing happens.

I don't understand this take. Those of us that want to solve climate change want nuclear, we want solar, we want it all. We want to give Hydrogen to Aluminum plants to supplant CO2 they release, we want to electricy cars, we want to feed seaweed to cows to stop their farts.

You might be arguing against a loud majority that is repeating dumb stuff, but surely HN attracts people that can ignore the bad policies and arguments and elevate the best?

"...when there's a huge peak in electricity demand at 6 pm when everyone gets home?"

The entire electrical generation industry knows all this. They know when clouds are coming and when wind will stop and model it all. Pricing information is sent ahead of time and plants know if they will be required to spin up or spin down well in advance. Especially something as simple as "everyone gets home at 6pm at a regular time every weekday". It is easy for plants with slow ramp times, such as nuclear and coal, to plan for that.

"If your economic thesis is based on hoping the government bans something, why are you even playing with state-resistant decentralized monetary systems? "

Because I want to make money? I don't see why that matters.

Ironically, ETH switching to PoS is the reason I am holding the currency.

In the future I expect all PoW cryptocurrencies to be banned, or severely hobbled, because of their electricity usage and e-waste. I have a long bet on ETH specifically because of its eventual move to PoS. Bitcoin doesn't even have a plan, and when the legal landscape changes it will be in the worst position to pivot.

We'll just have to see what the future holds. But I got my money down.

> How about they start by figuring out the concept of power efficiency in the web code that everyone runs?

Sure, a nice goal, but the Internet consumes maybe 10% of the world's electricity, and I highly doubt that is because of slow webpages. It is also "fairly easy" to green datacenter electrical usage because only the generation source need be changed, as opposed to replacing billions of cars, or even entire industrial practices like cement that give off CO2 as waste byproduct. All of which are in excess of 50% of total electrical usage. That, and we have to convert our powerplants anyway.

Lastly, my understanding of slow webpages is largely IO and latency, not compute, which further reduces the link between slow pages and electrical usage.

How should a doctor know how to treat you if you don't tell them what caused the problems? Doctors don't just hear you list a bunch of things you are "feeling" as symptoms and then output a pill to take. They need to look at your overall health, wellbeing, symptoms, medicine you are taking, diet, etc.

You can't just show up to a hospital with crack or heroin withdrawl and be like "I don't feel well, please help me". They are going to ask why you don't feel well.