wwweston

Every settlement reaches a level of density where they have to re-reckon with land use rules collectively — that’s one of the deep flaws in a primarily private approach to land however appealing (and definitely particularly popular in boomer heydays).

I think this is a really good question, and the answer might be that ideally you move up and down the ladder of abstraction, learning from concrete examples in some domains, then abstracting across them, then learning from applying the abstractions, then abstracting across abstractions, then cycling through the process.

Anyone have this (or another linux distro) working with an nvidia rtx 5060?

No thanks to this level of evaluation which doesn’t even rise to “analysis”, it’s just a word salad association that picks two hobby horses and pretends they represent the apocalypse while ignoring all the measures on which many EU participating countries are producing quality of life and personal freedom at outlier levels.

“They are all crooks” is the motto of another kind of personal corruption: the kind where people abdicate any responsibility to detail or distinction for the sheer indulgence of moral posture without any of the work.

Every time someone says “they’re all crooks” they are the enablers of crooks. The crooks couldn’t do it without people like that.

A 20k LOC PR isn’t reviewable in any normal workflow/process.

The only moves are refusing to review it, taking it up the chain of authority, or rubber stamping it with a note to the effect that it’s effectively unreviewable so rubber stamping must be the desired outcome.

What’s the tooling you’re using, and the workflow you find yourself drawn to that boosts productivity?

Might be worth asking: Why would “the media” do this? Over thousands of outlets?

Sounds like your Mac Plus died with covid (and really irresponsible customer property management), but not from covid…

Being very online, probably.

Also, it’s writing code for a social product.

Also, Wendell Berry isn’t exactly just a farmer but grew up one and kept as much as he could while becoming a fine writer who talks about life lessons. More people should read him.

> It doesn’t seem to offer any of the “value” that social networks do, the prime of which being an easy-to-initialize profile with copious features.

It might be this is a feature, not a bug. Making things easy did help a lot of people connect in at the start, but connecting in the careless also has hazards, much less the content casino digital media has become.

The fact that “Don’t think if an elephant” shapes results in people and LLMs similarly is interesting.

Past industrial and other productivity jumps have had their fruits distributed unevenly. Why will this be different?

Most technology is a magnifier.

This is my experience. Code generation is OK if uneven, but debugging can be a big boost.

It’s a rubber duck that’s pretty educated and talks back.

The crucial understanding is that incentives are cross aligned because the product is risk coverage.

The more immediate/pressing your need for risk coverage, the worse it is for them to sell it to you. The less you need it, the better it is for them to sell it to you and the worse for you to buy it.

Pretty different than ice cream or cars or housing. Too many people just think “oh corporate greed” without thinking about the underlying economics (partly because of how us culture pretends markets are magic).

no more turgid than the much of the boner for building boosterism, just more notes, which may not be a bad thing if some of the scope of consideration could stand to be inflated.

before I check vital city, should I anticipate that they go beyond articulating “here’s a series of public institutions that took a long time to do things“ and perhaps even into “here’s our theory of the incentives and other motivations that underlie the sociology of this behavior”? or mostly the former?

The “it is not immediately clear” part should be taken to heart a lot more than it is. Right now I’d bet you could elect Ezra Klein president and he would be as unable to improve things as most, and he probably has a somewhat clearer picture of the factors than your average internet commentator.

Railing against optimizing for caution in a vague sense really isn’t articulating specific dynamics however well it leans into the shallow strawmanification of “regulation” that doesn’t merely dominate lay discourse but has essentially ascended into conceptual godhood without having paid real dues in sacrifice or insight.

There is no respectable theory of why that has even begun to grasp the problem.

And it’s not only never done, it’s always on the verge of dying off. Like Bill Thurston said, mathematical understanding basically lives in communities of mathematicians, every one of them a cell in the superorganism that is the field. You’re part of the distributed filesystem providing persistence as well as the possibility of new understanding.

https://mathoverflow.net/questions/43690/whats-a-mathematici...

Adobe has been thinking about GenAI longer than you probably have (probably added because this is HN and you never know).

I got to talk to a product engineer about some of their work back in 2021, and he was describing generative (and even generative-editive) capabilities they had in hand that most associate with the last two years, they were just figuring out how to productize them, many of which they have.

I have my own complaints about Adobe products and choices but they are far from out of the game, and they’re probably going to be fine, especially if a lot of people make the mistake of thinking of them primarily as a dinosaur Figma competitor.

Still keep a machine on Mojave to use FW CS 6 and will probably eventually have a VM running it to use it, it’s a distinctive combination of features.

Upvoted, bad user behavior isn’t the only factor incentivizing poor feedback systems, but it’s one of them.

Having gatekeepers isn’t so much the problem — there’s stuff almost everyone agrees should be gatekept (and other things that maybe should be even when not everyone agrees).

The problem is that we build these systems where no one seems to want to or have incentive to thin about responsible administration, reasonable feedback, appeal, and accountability. Everybody who can just gets lawyers that work to insulate themselves, sometimes because they don’t give a damn and sometimes because that’s what the incentives of exposure sometimes abused are.

I think the SCSS and SASS implementations I used 5-10 years back had the capability but didn’t require any set variables, and I think one point of the argument is that this has more benefits than you’d think.

Heh, fair, not a super clear phrase. What I’m trying to evoke is that tailwind has a few merits that do produce a local elevation on a few points of front end dev experience… but not much (and for some the tradeoffs cancel it out) and that more is possible.

This is a novel take that I think genuinely adds something to tired tailwind discourse:

> I think the most important factor in Tailwind's success is that it does one thing very correctly: it demands the developer who installs it set up a config file that lays out all codebase-wide style constants: colors, margin sizes, fonts, border radii, etc. Writing individual styles that do not use a pre-configured constant from the config file is clunky in Tailwind. This is a good thing, an unironic win for Tailwind. More than anything else, this is what a large codebase with multiple frontend devs needs: a rigid set of global constants that everyone is strongly incentivized to use.

I’m still considering its merits, but it at least goes beyond the “How I learned to stop worrying and embrace tailwind’s standardized soup” vs “I can’t stand this, it goes against every organizing principle I’ve found useful” familiar dichotomy.

You’re correct in the sense that they’re both big noisy blobs that dilute semantic/functional signals.

You’re neglecting the design system work that goes into tailwind classes. I don’t particularly like its choices (and generally consider tailwind to be a minimal local maximum for a set of tradeoffs deserving of faint praise), but they’re something, and in an engineering culture that won’t adopt a better mindset or better tooling, it’s something that solves a few problems well enough.

The more stuff is managed by algorithms, the more it’ll become important that there is a legal right to challenge them and even hold those who adopt or implement them some kind of accountable.

The first rule of IAC club is that you do not hand modify your infrastructure.

The second rule of IAC club is that you do not hand modify your infrastructure.

Golf courses are semi-regular targets of concern for both people concerned about water availability and housing. So while I’m not sure what your purpose for looping them in is, their existence hardly absolves other water-demanding industry much less establishes anything remotely like a sound basis for establishing bad faith.

We could use more media discourse on the current political realities of water use and potential improved economic structure though.

So your understanding is that the chief value a software engineer provides is experience utilizing a specific toolchain/compiler/language to generate code. Is that correct?