It is truly odd in a way. You had posts here about Google managers or execs saying AI coded something solid in a few days what their own team were working on for months or years, or something along those lines. But people seem to ignore that creating a clone of your favorite "Claw" product seems like an ideal first project for the sea of mid or senior engineers that haven't dipped their toes into the vibe-coding ocean.
You have people talking about the tired topic of the lack of moat for AI businesses. But people should be calling out the moat that most tech businesses take for granted. Forget the moat that prevents other businesses, what about the moat that prevents your own users from creating your own product "from scratch"?
>Netflix is what you put on while you are doing other things.
Yeah, I watch all films I consider worth seeing in the theater frankly. I rarely have nightmarishly disruptive movie going experiences. Any disruptions are minuscule compared to the infinite attention distractions at home or on any viewing portal connected to the internet.
And sometimes I go specifically for the rowdy crowd experience. For example, watching Grand Theft Hamlet with a appreciative (and somewhat drunk) rowdy crowd in the theater was fucking fantastic. Ironically, someone in Riot Games, the company that decided to stream Arcane on Netflix, also knew this very well when they rented movie theaters across the world and had screening events ahead of official Netflix release dates for episodes from the the latest Arcane season -- for an audience mostly composed of ballistic League of Legend cosplaying gen Zs and alphas.
The people who play politics also have their work judged by results. Getting yourself promoted to head a project that prints money for the company with little cost doesn't necessarily cause the project to stop printing money.
Yes, and unfortunately the “desire” for scientific research of everyday life is hard to maintain because frankly in our current times it has dawned on many that scientific research is unable, by itself, to prevent or limit actions taken that fly in the face of the said research. So some domain experts have realized that upping their social media game is a better investment than broadening their scientific research efforts, because you’ve already lost if you are unable to derail a delusional narrative in real time. It’s the era of yellow journalism 2.0.
You’re right to chastise me about the title. I had to remove all the qualifiers to meet the title character limit (also negative-> neg for that reason), so the title was more chicken little than I would have liked, but I did leave the qualifiers in the explanation, where I wasn’t claiming that all noobie posts were getting killed. My primary intention was to warn some of the good faith noobies who looked like they were getting caught up in the spam filter, and a post that noobies could see seemed to be a more appropriate venue for that. I didn't think my post would provide any extra utility to spammers. I apologize if the person that emailed you wasn’t a good-faith noobie poster concerned about their own posts.
But overall, because of the information asymmetry, I do think you underestimate the positive impact on the community of you coming out of the woodwork to provide explanations about specific instances once in awhile, as much as you loath to do so it seems.
e.g. TIL approx +50% of noobie posts are potential spam at a given time.
>it means that they shares (let's say) the gussed city name with Microsoft.
I'm not sure I understand or maybe I'm missing something, sharing the guessed city is not "technically" sharing your IP address? (I understand that it's still sharing more info than what you thought)
Let's say the steps are:
1. You type in "exhibition" to ddg
2. DDG sends "exhibition in <guessed city>" to Bing using its own random datacenter IP address
3. Sends you back results
Did it now "share your IP address with Microsoft"?
>Then again, you did assume that this was done automatically.
If you see multiple [dead] stories that are minutes old by different users that have non-clickbait tech titles it is not unreasonable to think auto-moderation is a more likely explanation than someone manually killing every single post in near real-time by keeping a filter algorithm in their head and manually checking whether each expression in that algorithm is true or false.
>I don't find it hilarious.
If YC was asking for AI startup submissions but HN was auto-killing noobie AI submissions I would find that hilarious in a black comedy sense. Pity we don't share the same absurdist humor.
If you go to the "lists" page there is literally a "noobstories" page, because someone deemed that that would be an interesting filter for some people to explore. What's the point of posting if you're a noob if you know your legit post is going to be auto-killed and no-one is going to see it?
Good-faith posters should know that this is what is happening (assuming the auto-killing is intentional and not a bug) so they can go and try to build enough karma from their comments before posting a story.
I have no idea how random the librewolf maintainers are but the next iteration raising the bar for high-impact open source projects should definitely have a checkbox for "has a key maintainer with a active public profile/streetcred in industry" on the checklist.
It's called a "shadow government" in European (?) parlance[0], though not to be confused with the term "deep state". That is, the opposition basically prepares a shadow government to signal to the public that, despite not being power, they have the qualified personnel ready to go on day 1 if they come back to power. The down side for MAGA when firing all these workers in all these agencies is that it gives the opposition the opportunity to organize a "department in waiting" for every agency that is gutted by gathering the most-qualified of the fired employees.
But just another billionaire doing this instead of an organized opposition is not ideal, to say the least. ex 18F workers should get someone they trust more in the mix.
>when the Country needed Americans to call out the corruption
Just for the record, Trump tried to get the attorney general of the Southern District of New York to drop the case against the mayor of New York, a Democrat, in exchange for the mayor to give ICE carte-blanche to do what it wants in the city. So illegal was the requested action that seven people including the acting attorney general resigned immediately in sequence. Mind you, the acting attorney general was appointed by Trump literally three weeks before her resignation. And the resignations only stopped because Bove threatened to fire everyone in the office (30 odd people) if someone didn't accept. If that wasn't enough, and since some on the thread mentioned Soviet propaganda, Homan the border czar trotskies out Eric Adams on Fox News and forces him to applaud what ICE is doing, and then Homan proceeds to tell Eric Adams on national television that if he backs out that he Homan will be in his office right away and "up his ass".
That level of corruption would be choreographed nicely to Nixon's "Saturday Night Massacre."
If you want to read two bad-ass resignations by Republican attorney generals, read Sassoon's and Hagan Scotten's resignation letters.
>US involvement forced Israel to withdraw unilaterally from Gaza in 2005
Ah yes, history started in 2005. Let's talk post-2005 then. This was when Netanyahu, an elected leader of Israel, openly bragged about aiding and building up Hamas, a terrorist organization, in order to weaken the PLO's power. That is of course, until the chickens came home to roost. It would take a certain amount of delusion to claim that this was not the issue, but unoccupying a land unlawfully occupied was the problem.
The parent post is by and large correct, except for the right-hand man of Donald Trump stuff. Musk was indeed trying to buy influence, which is definitely not a "5D chess move" but simply common sense for extremely wealthy people if they can get away with it. He also wanted to ensure that he is always the center of attention and intended to use twitter as the marketing arm for his brand. He only wanted to back out once US and global economic indicators started going south and made his offer look ridiculously overpriced, and also made himself look like a sucker. And Musk does not like being the sucker. But his wanting to back out later doesn't cancel out his initial intentions. And once he was forced to buy it, he started playing high stakes poker and managed to turn it into a great investment for him personally by the end of 2024, becoming one of the most powerful men in the world in addition to being the richest. How long it will last might depend on how many consecutive presidential terms the Republicans can hold on to.
The righthand man for Trump stuff was never the intention initially. Musk went gaga for Trump rather late, he was a DeSantis supporter after all, with DeSantis launching his terrible presidential bid on Elon's twitter.
This is the correct answer. Trump won because of the current economy. Biden's margin over Trump in 2020 was double Trump's margin over Kamala. Democrats did better than expected in 2022 despite Republicans running with the same DEI garbage.
What's baffling is Trump seems to be fumbling the autocrat's handbook at first glance. There are existing autocrats still around that wrote the book on this. Purging the administrative state requires multi-term government domination. First, you're supposed get the economy or quality of life on track ASAP so you can cement your (or you successor's) seat at the top. Then you use the power the people voluntarily give you over multiple terms to dismantle any checks on your power while lining the pockets and minds of your base. After that, even if the economy tanks you've boiled the frog of resistance in such a way that no one can dethrone you. And then you start designing the opposition in such a way so that there's semblance of "political freedom" you can point to when people start whining about it.
Trump seems to be going about it in reverse. First feeding his base instead of focusing on the economy -- which is a higher risk strategy comparatively. But it hasn't even been a month yet so there is still time for him to start following the handbook properly.
>We grew up on hopeful sci-fi and will stick to it until our bitter end.
American optimism and hope did not derive itself from "hopeful sci-fi" or tech. The sci-fi and tech came in its superpower phase, post-WWII. American optimism preceded that by decades if not centuries, because its population believed--despite everything--that as country it always strove to act in a morally just manner both domestically and internationally. What's more is that this mythology, cause that's what it was, happened to be accepted by much of world as well. That accomplishment in persuasion exceeds any accomplishment in short-term innovation when the goal is to maintain a long-lasting empire.
There was a time when many thought Nazi Germany was the most innovative and advanced entity in the world. Yet, even at the time, no one who believed that would care to immigrate to Nazi Germany for that reason. The same would be true if China became the most technologically advanced country in the world.
It is the man-child delusion of the broligarchy to claim that American optimism is (was) rooted in technological advancement.
Here's a take that I came across which I'd like your views on if possible:
When the Civil Right Act and Americans with Disabilities Act were created, people asked the government to enforces these acts. Whatever you think of merits of DEI, the government decided to create DEI in order to enforce the Civil Rights Act and Americans with Disabilities act.
The problem is because they decided that DEI would be the mechanism to do this with, once DEI is rescinded the question is: If you're not going to enforce the Civil Right Act and Americans with Disabilities Act through DEI, which mechanism do you plan to use to enforce them? According to this take, once DEI is rescinded there is no mechanism to enforce the Civil Right Act and Americans with Disabilities Act anymore.
I'm pretty sure that most leftwing and rightwing people will agree that out of 3 millions government workers it's not entirely unlikely that there would be some some valid cases of discrimination against minorities and those with disabilities. The claim is that, whether DEI sucks or not, there is no avenue to contest racism and discrimination in government hiring anymore.
You have people talking about the tired topic of the lack of moat for AI businesses. But people should be calling out the moat that most tech businesses take for granted. Forget the moat that prevents other businesses, what about the moat that prevents your own users from creating your own product "from scratch"?