I have a lot of fun memories about when I moved to SF in 2006. Among them was meeting Craig and interacting with him casually a handful of times. He was a regular at Reverie in Cole Valley, where a good friend and mentor of mine was also a regular. The two of them were friends and times I'd meet with my friend, i'd sometimes talk to Craig. He always seemed kind and had a sharp wit. I remember the first time I met him, my friend introduced me and said I had just moved to town. I blurted out, "know a good way to find an apartment?" Craig gave me a good-natured eye roll.
I asked him one time what he was doing. Answering emails, he said. Customer support emails. I think he really enjoyed that part of the business.
I'm not picking up any subjective, simplistic labeling like "good" or "bad." Are we reading the same paper?
Haven't fully read the paper, just the introduction and skimmed through the rest, but it seems they're merely observing that a rent control law went into effect, and given some control variables, it seems like it depressed property values.
Their findings also suggest that while the wealth transfer of rent control factor is real -- that is, landlords are impacted more and existing renters see relative benefit -- that effect is greater among higher-income renters and less among lower income renters.
Second paragraph in the Conclusion:
"While the negative wealth effects for owners are large, our results show the positive effects of the law are poorly targeted. Though the intention is to benefit lower income renters, we find that the largest benefits are received in the neighborhoods of the city in which renters have higher incomes, are less likely to be minorities, and have more education. To the extent that price drops for rental properties reflect future rent savings, and thus housing wealth gains for tenants, our results suggest that the largest cost savings are going to be realized in the neighborhoods with the richest, most educated, and least diverse owners."
I agree with the sentiments -- knowing the scope of a change is more essential, in most cases, than knowing whether the change was a "fix" or a "feature" -- but much of the scope in a project can be gleaned from the files which were touched. So the use case of, "i need to quickly at a glance determine what commits touched what parts of the project" can be answered with some variation on
Half of the purpose of me documenting things is to make certain that I fully understand the problem and its solution.
As I write out the explanation, if something doesn't make sense, that is a prompt for me to dig in and understand more fully either what I am supposed to accomplish and/or how I intend to do it.
That applies to everything from single-line comments on up to project READMEs and polished, customer-facing documentation.
One consistent frustration I have had over the years is that so much code is not documented or (worse) poorly documented. If there is a silver-lining to AI-assisted programming, it is that clear writing of goals and proposed solutions are rewarded with more accurate outcomes. It should have always been thus. but I'll take it.
As I'm sure many people on HN with kids do, I think very highly of my toddler's capabilities. I'm looking forward to the day I can stick him on a cross-town bus and have him fly solo (or at least with a peer/buddy). I'm hoping he can do it by age eight or nine. That was the same age my parents let me ride my bike several miles across town to a friend's house.
My biggest fear for my kid out in the world is not abduction, but injury or death by automobile.
as someone who laments the loss of spaces and pastimes that once brought people together -- bowling alleys, dance halls, pubs, movie houses, etc. -- to work from home, home entertainment and especially anything and everything online, I keep hoping for some kind of reversal.
Maybe the day is getting closer when anything and everything internet-related is so drenched in uncanny artifice and extractionary intention that people will yearn for imperfect, multidimensional reality, and feel like the best thing they can do with their time is walk through the park with a friend.
It's not that credit card companies have some kind of moral bone to pick, it is that the legal, logistical and political morass of dealing with the variety of state and national laws, definitions of porn, protections of children and non-consenting performers, etc. are such that it is not worth it for them to pursue.
Similar issues exist for, e.g., companies and sites selling legal THC and THC products.
There is a psychological hype effect which affects both audience and performers in a capacity room of any size. Whether it's 50 or 5000, if the room is full, you feel it, and it adds to the excitement, tension and maybe magic of the event. There's nothing worse than playing an empty room, and some of the best times I've ever had have been with a band and thirty people crammed into a living room.
It's not even "in the street" I'm worried about -- it's the lunatics who drive like they are the main character in a single-player RPG. Not looking for bikes or pedestrians, crashing into parked cars and houses.
It’s interesting comparing the enthusiasm I see in this thread compared to the more jaded responses I’ve seen in r/synthesizers
I think it looks cool and fun. Wish my workflow and time could accommodate it right now but they can’t. I’m really curious to hear what people who spend time with it are able to do.