Unlurker|Replay|About
Ask HN: Ideas for small ways to make the world a better place
•
This is a great idea!Like I move around a lot in various online communities, I always Encountering all kinds of comments.Please support the comments you think are right, I think this can increase the confidence of the publisher and also makePlease support the comments you think are right, I think this can increase the confidence of the publisher and also make yourself feel happy.When more and more excellent speeches are encouraged, the world will become a little bit better.
•
https://www.effectivealtruism.org/ at scale. Kindness, listening, time, and charity to those around you at the microcosm level.
•
Better known as "charity" among people that don't need their egos stroked.
Show HN: I spent 4 years building a UI design tool with only the features I use (vecti.com)
•
Comparing this to penpot, which is free as long as you self-host. Not sure why I would pick this over a self-hostable battle-tested option.
•
Trying to login with google I got a social auth error: https://app.vecti.com/dashboard/social-auth-error/
•
Thanks for reporting, I'm looking into it.
•
Nice. My gripe with designer apps is that they are online first. I'd want to save designs to files, close to other files of the project. I'd want to open each file in their own window, not in browser tabs.
•
Sketch is offline first but has a really stellar online app as well.
Any chance this will be open-sourced or have a self-hosted version available? I'm interested in modding tools in this space in pursuit of finding weird new ways to create and work with UIs
•
If you're looking for an open-source and self-host option then you might to checkout https://penpot.app/
> I kept finding myself using a small amount of the features while the rest just mostly got in the way. So a few years ago I set out to build a design tool just like I wanted. So I built Vecti with what I actually need... Joel Spolsky said (I'm paraphrasing) that everybody only uses 20% of a given program's features, but the problem is that everyone is using a different 20%, so you can't ship an "unbloated" version and expect it to still work for most people. So it looks like you've built something really cool, but I have to ask what makes you think that the features that are personally important to you are the same features that other potential users need? Since this clearly seems to be something you're trying to create a business out of rather than just a personal hobby project. I'm curious how you went about customer research and market validation for the specific subset of features that you chose to develop?
•
> Joel Spolsky said (I'm paraphrasing) that everybody only uses 20% of a given program's features, but the problem is that everyone is using a different 20%, so you can't ship an "unbloated" version and expect it to still work for most people. To me this is an argument for more apps that do less extremely well instead of a handful of apps that do everything poorly. There's nothing wrong with a tool that's honed for very specific user. They'll never hyperscale, but that's also fine. Or then again maybe they can. Google Docs is plenty popular despite being closer to WordPad or TextEdit in terms of functionality than it is to MS Word.
•
I feel like HTML and CSS could remove 90% of the functionality and only affect 1% of developers, then we could get some actually good web browsers.
Makes me wish more apps had feature toggles
•
The testing that would be required to support toggles would be for 2^n. I’m not sure that’s a good solution.
•
Makes me wish more apps followed the UNIX model of separating every feature into separate applications with well documented interfaces that only change when new features absolutely require it and otherwise are only updated for security patches.
•
Yeah I like that idea too. Theres a lot of people who would have trouble with that approach though.
I think a successful product strategy can be "build something you love, see if others love it too". If that's enough customers, you can judiciously expand out from there. The "fail honestly" method. I think the Apple II is one example of this.
•
If ten people make focused tools covering different 20% subsets of the giant ones, there's a good chance of having a choice that matches what any given customer wants. And for most customers, that's going to be a better match than a big tool that does tons of other stuff they didn't want.
Thank you, and I know exactly what you mean. I myself have rewritten the entire engine ar least three times until I was happy with the performance and the overall outcome. It’s been a long learning experience. As a developer at heart, this project scratched every itch I had from a software engineering perspective :)
•
You should write about this, the gotchas and what you learned how to make things performant. Might drive some traffic.
•
How much of this release was made easier with LLMs?
Man who videotaped himself BASE jumping in Yosemite arrested, says it was AI (latimes.com)
•
bikes into thread BASED jumping is an acronym that stand for five categories of fixed objects from which one can jump: - Buildings - Antennas - Spans - Earth - Deepfakes bikes out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1ULJ92aldE (<- finally found the track used in so many CNC machining youtube shorts).
•
https://archive.is/tfznK
•
Ha ... everything is AI now. No accountability.
If it "was AI" it should be easy enough for him to prove by pulling up his account on whatever AI video generation service he used and showing the generation in his account history. (I do not think it was AI.)
•
Maybe he doesn't have to prove that though. If he can find an expert witness who will make claims that based on their expert analysis it is possible this video is AI generated, and he does not testify himself, then that may be enough to introduce reasonable doubt.
Do you have a link? Dudes got class.
•
I'm sure it was a GoPro - was mocking the journalist's use of the Ye olde term 'videotaped'
-
•
Not sure what warrants the name-calling and whataboutism here. Who's talking about "predators"? This thread is about BASE jumping.
Would there be liability lawsuits for this happening on public land? Might it be more a matter of them not wanting to do body clean up once a week?
•
This seems like something a liability waiver and an escrow account with money for body clean up (if things go bad) would solve. A little red tape, sure, but not illegal.
there aren't that many accidents. It's also more dangerous to jump in ways that attempt to skirt laws (jumping near dark, trying to evade capture, etc)
•
I’m convinced this is how Dean Potter died. Jumping at dusk to try to evade capture my Yosemite rangers. If it had been legal, and had he jumped in broad daylight, I think he’d have survived that day.
Because it's very dangerous and first responders access in national parks isn't always easy. You can obtain a permit to do it, however, see this memo that summarizes the current situation: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/policy/upload/NPS_Guidance_Memo_BASE_Jumping.pdf
•
It seems danger and first responder access would also be a problem for free solo climbing, yet that gets a pass.
> There would also be a requirement for all playback to actually properly check the private keys I don't think that's true. Only for someone who wanted to prove authenticity to grab the signature. No private keys would be exposed (except those which were hacked.) If Netflix and Amazon can't keep their 4k HDR webrips from being leaked (supposedly via extracted licenses from Nvidia Shields), I have no idea how we'd expect all camera manufacturers to do it. Maybe iPhones and flagship Apple devices, but even then we'd find vulns in older devices over time.
•
I was thinking more about the spread of disinformation at large - but yea, that playback requirement would only be necessary for anything that wanted to be considered a potential source and trying to protect against disinformation platforms is a much larger problem then technology can solve on its own.
Show HN: If you lose your memory, how to regain access to your computer? (eljojo.github.io)
•
I explicitly make it so I cannot regain access to my computer in the event that my memory becomes faulty. I would be in an impaired state, and cannot function in way that would be conducive to either work or pleasure in terms of computer use. That is to say, the entire reason why I have password security at all is to keep out people who do not know the password. If someone does not know the password, they should not be able to access the system. That obviously and clearly applies to myself as much as any other person. "If you do not know it, then you do not need it."
•
I keep account passwords in a physical safe. If anything happens, I can cut into it. If it ever gets stolen, I can change the passwords. This might not be the best solution for disk encryption, but loosing access to my computer would not be the terrible: I'd mostly just loose a few days of work... but loosing access to my server or email would be a huge pain.
•
Write down the password, print out recovery codes. Store them in separate buildings. Tell someone you trust about where you left these pieces of paper.
•
a safe-deposit box at a bank works ok too.
•
Low tech: I put my secret manager password in a physical journal that is locked in a fire proof, water proof vault and hidden somewhere only my partner and myself know where it is. I use a password manager. Everything else goes in the password manager.
•
For this purpose Google offers "Inactive Account Manager" AKA a dead man's switch.
•
I suffered a traumatic brain injury (TBI) related to an e-bike accident two years ago. I woke up in the ICU after a short coma-like thing and the nurses/doctors asking me questions and it was clear I was answering for the 10th time or more, like we had all done this before, but I couldn't remember anything. Thankfully my very long password I use for an encrypted Borgbackup I have was somewhere deep or untouched, but, otherwise I would have been fucked. Also, the backup codes Google told me they would always accept failed and it wasn't until I found a random unused Android device in a drawer that had been unused for a year was I able to get access back to my Google account of ~25 years.
•
I also had old Google backup codes fail a few years ago. Anybody who hasn't regenerated them in a year or two, I recommend you do so.
•
Well, this is disturbing news.
How to effectively write quality code with AI (heidenstedt.org)
•
Too bad that software developers are carrying water for those who hate them and mock them for being obsolete in 6-12 months, while they are eating caviar (probably evading sanctions) and clink the champagne glasses in Davos: https://xcancel.com/hamptonism/status/2019434933178306971 And all that after stealing everyone's output.
•
That sounds like the advice of someone who doesn't actually write high-quality code. Perhaps a better title would be "how to get something better than pure slop when letting a chatbot code for you" - and then it's not bad advice I suppose. I would still avoid such code if I can help it at all.
I wonder at the end of this if it's the still worth the risk? A lot of how I form my thoughts is driven by writing code, and seeing it on screen, running into its limitations. Maybe it's the kind of work I'm doing, or maybe I just suck, but the code to me is a forcing mechanism into ironing out the details, and I don't get that when I'm writing a specification.
•
That's also how I feel. I think you have every right to doubt those telling us that they run 5 agents to generate a new SAAS-product while they are sipping latté in a bar. To work like that I believe you'll have to let go of really digging into the code, which in my experience is needed if want good quality. Yet I think coding agents can be quite a useful help for some of the trivial, but time consuming chores. For instance I find them quite good at writing tests. I still have to tweak the tests and make sure that they do as they say, but overall the process is faster IMO. They are also quite good at brute-forcing some issue with a certain configuration in a dark corner of your android manifest. Just know that they WILL find a solution even if there is none, so keep them on a leash! Today I used Claude for bringing a project I abandoned 5 years ago up to speed. It's still at work in progress, but the task seemed insurmountable (in my limited spare time) without AI, now it feels like I'm half-way there in 2-3 hours.
•
I was just thinking this the other day after I did a coding screen and didn't do well. I know the script for the interviewee is your not suppsed to write any code until you talk through the whole thing, but I think i woukd have done better if I could have just wrote a bunch of throw away code to iterate on.
•
I couldn't agree more. It's often when you are in the depth of the details that I make important decisions on how to engineer the continuation.
•
Exactly. 30 years ago a mathematician I knew said to me: "The one thing that you can say for programming is that it forces you to be precise." We vibe around a lot in our heads and that's great. But it's really refreshing, every so often, to be where the rubber meets the road.
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
Learning from context is harder than we thought (hy.tencent.com)
•
LLMs of the future will need good data for proper context, but it is less and less making it onto the internet. Unpublished data stores like Discord or meeting recordings are going to be the only way forward. How else can you get up to date information except to be where the people are. Norms will shift, be prepared.
•
It is weird to read because they bring up many things a lot of people have been critiquing for years. > But as impressive as these feats are, they obscure a simple truth: being a "test-taker" is not what most people need from an AI. > In all these cases, humans aren't relying solely on a fixed body of knowledge learned years ago. We are learning, in real-time, from the context right in front of us. > To bridge this gap, we must fundamentally change our optimization direction. I'm glad the conversation is changing but it's been a bit frustrating that when these issues were brought up people blindly point to benchmarks. It made doing this type of research difficult (enough to cause many to be pushed out). Then it feels weird to say "harder than we thought" because well... truthfully, they even state why this result should be expected > They rely primarily on parametric knowledge—information compressed into their weights during massive pre-training runs. At inference time, they function largely by recalling this static, internal memory, rather than actively learning from new information provided in the moment. And that's only a fraction of the story. Online algorithms aren't enough. You still need a fundamental structure to codify and compress information, determine what needs to be updated (as in what is low confidence), to actively seek out new information to update that confidence, make hypotheses, and so so much more. So I hope the conversation keeps going in a positive direction but I hope we don't just get trapped in a "RL will solve everything" trap. RL is definitely a necessary component and no doubt will it result in improvements, but it also isn't enough. It's really hard to do deep introspection into how you think. It's like trying to measure your measuring stick with your measuring stick. It's so easy to just get caught up in oversimplification and it seems like the brain wants to avoid it. To quote Feynman: "The first principle is to not fool yourself, and you're the easiest person to fool." It's even easier when things are exciting. It's so easy because you have evidence for your beliefs (like I said, RL will make improvements). It's so easy because you're smart, and smart enough to fool yourself. So I hope we can learn a bigger lesson: learning isn't easy, scale is not enough. I really do think we'll get to AGI but it's going to be a long bumpy road if we keep putting all our eggs in one basket and hoping there's simple solutions.
•
Bit by bit, we need to figure out how to rebuild human contextual understanding in a way that LLMs can understand. One thing that gets overlooked is the problem if incorrect data. You can provide all of the context in the world but LLMs tend to choke on contradictions or, at the minimum, work a whole lot harder to determine how to ignore or work around incorrect facts. "Forgetting" and "ignoring" are hugely valuable skills when building context.
•
> the problem if incorrect data. Was the typo intentional? :)
Hmm.. I looked at the benchmark set. I'm conflicted. I don't know that I would necessarily want a model to pass all of these. Here is the fundamental problem. They are putting the rules and foundational context in "user" messages. Essentially I don't think you want to train the models on full compliance to the user messages, they are essentially "untrusted" content from a system/model perspective. Or at least it is not generally "fully authoritative". This creates a tension with the safety, truthfulness training, etc.
•
Isn’t that what fine tuning does anyway? The article is suggesting that there should be a way for the LLM to gain knowledge (changing weights) on the fly upon gaining new knowledge which would eliminate the need for manual fine tuning.
There's a Terence McKenna quote about this: > So, for instance, you know, I’ve made this example before: a child lying in a crib and a hummingbird comes into the room and the child is ecstatic because this shimmering iridescence of movement and sound and attention, it’s just wonderful. I mean, it is an instantaneous miracle when placed against the background of the dull wallpaper of the nursery and so forth. But, then, mother or nanny or someone comes in and says, “It’s a bird, baby. Bird. Bird!” And, this takes this linguistic piece of mosaic tile, and o- places it over the miracle, and glues it down with the epoxy of syntactical momentum, and, from now on, the miracle is confined within the meaning of the word. And, by the time a child is four or five or six, there- no light shines through. They're- they have tiled over every aspect of reality with a linguistic association that blunts it, limits it, and confines it within cultural expectation.
•
and what is this quote supposed to explain? that language prevents a child from learning nuance? sounds like nonsense to me. a child first learns broad categories. for example some children as they learn to speak think every male person is dad. then they recognize everyone with a beard is dad, because dad has a beard. and only later they learn to differentiate that dad is only one particular person. same goes for the bird. first we learn hat everything with wings is a bird, and later we learn the specific names for each bird. this quote makes an absurd claim.
Fraud investigation is believing your lying eyes (bitsaboutmoney.com)
•
Instead of giving parents vouchers, that they then use at a fraudulent daycare, in exchange for a fake job, while they take care of their children at home, parents should just get money, so that they can stay home taking care of their children if they prefer that.
Is auditing state-subsidized service providers fascistic? From this piece, it seems like the state auditor detected some fraud, but there was little follow-up from either the state or 'responsible journalists', so the sensationalists came in with a (predictably) extreme take, after which everyone started slinging mud. The sensationalism could have been forestalled by better auditing by the state, or journalism by large-scale media. I am not sure what part of this is fascist.
•
to aggressively detect and interdict fraud is fascistic, because being aggressive hurts those that want to do it right but are not trusted. an aspect of fascism is to not trust its own people.
I'm working on making it a thing, but my theory is that power can't be destroyed, merely transferred, and in most cases I'd rather have the power be vested in a democratic government.
•
The best option is it being decentralized and diffuse and operating through market mechanisms. If that leads to bad outcomes, then government is a next best choice. (Of course, all the special cases, natural monopoly, etc etc etc-- government has a role in addressing the bad outcomes associated with those).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_the_zone A critical part of media literacy is not just evaluating a piece of work at face value, but considering who wrote it, why they wrote it, why they wrote it now, what they didn't write etc. The article itself is actually not really interesting, but why this person wrote this article now is interesting.
•
Please speak plainly, and show your work. In your own words, who do you believe "this person" is, and why is that significant? Why do you suppose he wrote "this article", "now", and what is your reason for believing thus? What other articles by the same author are you aware of, and how does that square with the bias you are trying to allege?
•
Reread my OP, I was pretty clear upfront and it answers all your questions.
The reason that "the left" is rolling eyes at the fuss being made over this fraud is: 1. The fraud is in fact being investigated, people are being charged and convicted. Despite this, rightwing media institutions are acting as if fraud is being ignored and maybe even covered up and encouraged because 2. This is just another example of the decades long project by those who have lots of money and don't want to see it go to takes to paint social programs as a money-pipe from good hardworking people to fraud and waste.
•
Fair enough. But the reason that "the right" is not letting go of the story is: 1. The fraud was not in fact being investigated seriously enough until this kid, even while lacking the basics of journalism as Patrick describes here, forced the issue. 2. This is just another example of the decades long trend where more and more bad patterns and outcomes can persist for far too long because the normal checks are fended off with spurious accusations of racism. There's some variation on how "the right" would handle (2). The center-right wants to shore up our culture of color-blindness to patch these vulnerabilities. The far-right wants to do away with egalitarianism altogether, and just go back to plain old racism. If we can't figure out the former, we might well end up with the latter.
> You're beating it around the bush going offtopic and ignoring my question: No I'm not, you just don't like the answer. But at least you've edited to remove the "3 guys yelling at you" portion as I think even you can see how that might be a reasonable thing to do to a creep going around you business filming everything. > daycare having a misspelled sign and boarded up windows? The answer to this question is simple, a poor one. And I suspect that a daycare that primarily gets it's funds from people using government welfare likely isn't rolling in the dough. Broken windows are expensive to fix, boards are cheap. A misspelled sign is embarrassing but again could easily be something that the owner of the facilities just wasn't assed to pay to replace and properly fix. My spouse worked for years in that sort of daycare which is why it's unsurprising to me that a daycare in that state exists. She, for example, did a full summer in Utah without AC while the kids were fed baloney sandwiches every day. Her's wasn't a daycare committing fraud, it was just an owner that was cutting costs at every corner to make sure their own personal wealth wasn't impacted. A shitty daycare isn't an indicator of fraud. It's an indicator that the state has low regulation standards for daycares. Lots of states have that, and a lot of these places end up staying in operation because states decide that keeping open an F grade daycare is cheap and better for the community vs closing it because it's crap quality. They certainly don't often want to take control of such a business and they know a competently ran one isn't likely to replace it if it is shutdown.
•
>My spouse worked for years in that sort of daycare Was your spouse also one of the all-male crews that those totally-not-a-scam MN daycares typically have? How many legit daycares have you ever seen where the staff is all men? And aggressive men at that. Just think about it for 3 seconds.
•
Now you are going off topic. I suspect because you don't like a reasonable answer that doesn't fit your fraud narrative. Men can work at daycares but also we have no clue what those guys relationship to the business was. Just think about it for 3 seconds.
Right, everybody, especially the author of this piece, agrees that what Shirley did was bad and stupid. And also unnecessary, because we had documentary evidence from the Minnesota government itself showing the scale of the fraud here.
•
He does not in fact call what Shirley did "bad and stupid". He calls him a journalist!
Rather than stating, without data, that Democratic Party alignment led to flagging of the story here on HN, one can look at the numerous overt statements by some of the most active users. These users claim they spend significant time flagging all political stories not tied to computing or science. These statements are trivially found using https://hn.algolia.com .
•
Typing “Trump” into that trivially reveals disparate outcomes. Then again perhaps “Trump says Maduro captured” is computing and science to these people. I have no peer-reviewed evidence that they don’t think that so I must admit it as equally likely as anything else.
The man has nothing nice to say about Bigfoot.
•
The alternative explanation that he is against cryptocurrency actually is true.
So it's a made up term from people who want to discredit people they don't like by calling them "secret racist" without having any proof.
•
I should warn you that the user you are replying to is a crypto-paedophile. Be careful. There is no evidence to describe how he might retaliate.
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
The overlooked evolution of the humble car door handle (newatlas.com)
•
Nice, but it would have been better with more pictures to match the description IMO
•
Website crashes mobile safari? Edit: correction it seems to be crashing on my adblock.
•
When I was about 20, I had a well used AMC Spirit. Stylish, good gas mileage, decent performance, it was a great car. It had one fatal flaw, a weak linkage in the drivers door handle. The linkage included a small plastic clip that didn’t quite align properly. It would pop out of place periodically, making the door impossible to open. I became adept at taking apart the door from the inside and popping the pieces back into place. I once returned to my college dorm after a snowstorm, the car got stuck in the snow. I had another trick for this situation, I’d ease the clutch out ( leaving the back tires spinning slowly ) and would exit the car, pushing it by hand. When the wheels caught and the car started creeping forward I’d jump back in and drive off. ( Foolish, I know. I was 20. ) Well, once I had both mishaps at once. The car got stuck, so I got out to push. The door handle broke, locking me out of my car with the engine running and the wheels slowly turning! Praying fervently, I ran to my dorm room, got my spare key and went in through the passenger door to stop the engine. It was a memorable day.
The additional drag is negligible. People have been producing "racing doors" with handles for decades. They focus on cutting all the other features of the door like weight and mechanical complexity instead. It's an even more irrelevant consideration for consumers, who could save far more fuel by changing how they drive. Flush handles exist as brand differentiators. They're a "futuristic" feel-good feature that consumers want, like engine noise, tablets, and colorful dashboards.
•
It's about more than just one thing alone. E.g. https://media.landrover.com/new-range-rover-sport-press-kit-performance-chapter#:~:text=These%20include%20the%20flush%20glazing%20and%20door%20handles%2C https://usa.infinitinews.com/en-US/releases/2025-qx80-press-kit#:~:text=result%20in%20a%20cleaner%2C%20tidier%20appearance%20and%20contribute%20to%20improvements%20in%20QX80%27s%20aerodynamic%20performance.
The Waymo World Model (waymo.com)
•
I'd like to see Waymo have a few of their Drivers do some sim racing training and then compete in some live events. It wouldn't matter much to me if they were fast at all, I'd like to see them go into the rookie classes in various games and see how they avoid crashes from inexperienced players. I believe that it would be the ultimate "shitty drivers vs. AI" test.
Interesting, but it feels like it's going to cope very poorly with actually safety-critical situations. Having a world model that's trained on successful driving data feels like it's going to "launder" a lot of implicit assumptions that would cause a car to get into a crash in real life (e.g. there's probably no examples in the training data where the car is behind a stopped car, and the driver pulls over to another lane and another car comes from behind and crashes into the driver because it didn't check its blindspot). These types of subtle biases are going to make AI-simulated world models a poor fit for training safety systems where failure cannot be represented in the training data, since they basically give models "free reign" to do anything that couldn't be represented in world model training.
•
You're forgetting that they are also training with real data from the 100+ million miles they've driven on real roads with riders, and using that data to train the world model AI. > there's probably no examples in the training data where the car is behind a stopped car, and the driver pulls over to another lane and another car comes from behind and crashes into the driver because it didn't check its blindspot This specific scenario is in the examples: https://videos.ctfassets.net/7ijaobx36mtm/3wK6IWWc8UmhFNUSyy4kCy/4595f848baa762961c945a8e080bbc16/fast_long_rollout_1.webm It doesn't show the failure mode, it demonstrates the successful crash avoidance.
1. Still hard not to think that this is a huge waste of time as opposed to something that's a little more like a public transport train-ish thing, i.e. integrate with established infrastructure. 2. No seriously, is the filipino driver thing confirmed? It really feels like they're trying to bury that.
•
They are not trying to "bury" remote assistance at all. They wrote a white paper about it in 2020 and a blog post about it in 2024. Anyway you can think it's a waste but they're wasting their money, not yours. If you want a train in your town, go get one. Waymo has only spent, cumulatively, about 4 months of the budgets of American transit agencies. If you had all that money it wouldn't amount to anything.
> Human drivers will be banned, the roads will be exclusively used by autonomous vehicles I basically agree with your premise that public transit as it exists today will be rendered obsolete, but I think this point here is where your prediction hits a wall. I would be stunned if we agreed to eliminate human drivers from the road in my lifetime, or the lifetime of anyone alive today. Waymo is amazing, but still just at the beginning of the long tail.
•
Is that: - I would be stunned if we agree to eliminate human drivers from 100% of roads in the lifetime of anyone alive today. or - I would be stunned if we agree to eliminate human drivers from 10% of roads... ...or is there some other percentage to qualify this? I guess I wouldn't expect there to be a decree that makes it happen all at once for a country. Especially a large country like the U.S.. More like, some really dense city will decide to make a tiny core autonomous vehicles only, and then some other cities also do years later. And then maybe it expands to something larger than just the core after 5 or 10 years. And so on...
That's a very interesting way of looking at it. Yes, you start with simulating something simpler than the real world. Then you use the real world. Then you need to go back to simulations for real-world things that are too rare in the real world to train with. Seems like there ought to be a name for this, like so-and-so's law.
•
hazrmard's law
Suddenly all this focus on world models by Deep mind starts to make sense. I've never really thought of Waymo as a robot in the same way as e.g. a Boston Dynamics humanoid, but of course it is a robot of sorts. Google/Alphabet are so vertically integrated for AI when you think about it. Compare what they're doing - their own power generation , their own silicon, their own data centers, search Gmail YouTube Gemini workspace wallet, billions and billions of Android and Chromebook users, their ads everywhere, their browser everywhere, waymo, probably buy back Boston dynamics soon enough (they're recently partnered together), fusion research, drugs discovery.... and then look at ChatGPT's chatbot or grok's porn. Pales in comparison.
•
The flywheel is starting to spin......
Google has been doing more R&D and internal deployment of AI and less trying to sell it as a product. IMHO that difference in focus makes a huge difference. I used to think their early work on self-driving cars was primarily to support Street View in thier maps.
•
It has always felt to me that the LLM chatbots were a surprise to Google, not LLMs, or machine learning in general.
The vertical integration argument should apply to Grok. They have Tesla driving data (probably much more data than Waymo), Twitter data, plus Tesla/SpaceX manufacturing data. When/if Optimus starts on the production line, they'll have that data too. You could argue they haven't figured out how to take advantage of it, but the potential is definitely there.
•
"Tesla has more data than Waymo" is some of the lamest cope ever. Tesla does not have more video than Google! That's crazy! People who repeat this are crazy! If there was a massive flow of video from Tesla cars to Tesla HQ that would have observable side effects.
> Suddenly all this focus on world models by Deep mind starts to make sense Google's been thinking about world models since at least 2018: https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.10122
•
FWIW I understood GP to mean that it suddenly makes sense to them, not that there’s been a sudden focus shift at google.
Without Lidar + the terrible quality of tesla onboard cameras.. street view would look terrible. The biggest L of elon's career is the weird commitment to no-lidar. If you've ever driven a Tesla, it gives daily messages "the left side camera is blocked" etc.. cameras+weather don't mix either.
•
>>The biggest L of elon's career is the weird commitment to no-lidar. I thought it was the Nazi salutes on stage and backing neo-nazi groups everywhere around the world, but you know, I guess the lidar thing too.
This is so wild to read when Waymo is currently doing like 500,000 paid rides every week , all over the country, with no one in the driver's seat. Meanwhile Tesla seems to have a handful of robotaxis in Austin, and it's unclear if any of them are actually driverless. But the Tesla engineers are "in the right place rather than hitting bottlenecks from over depending on Lidar data"? What?
•
Tesla has driven 7.5B autonomous miles to Waymo's 0.2B, but yes, Waymo looks like they are ahead when you stratify the statistics according to the ass-in-driver-seat variable and neglect the stratum that makes Tesla look good. The real question is whether doing so is smart or dumb. Is Tesla hiding big show-stopper problems that will prevent them from scaling without a safety driver? Or are the big safety problems solved and they are just finishing the Robotaxi assembly line that will crank out more vertically-integrated purpose-designed cars than Waymo's entire fleet every day before lunch?
Sensor fusion is an issue, one that is solvable over time and investment in the driving model, but sensor-can't-see-anything is a show stopper. Having a self-driving solution that can be totally turned off with a speck of mud, heavy rain, morning dew, bright sunlight at dawn and dusk.. you can't engineer your way out of sensor-blindness. I don't want a solution that is available to use 98% of the time, I want a solution that is always-available and can't be blinded by a bad lighting condition. I think he did it because his solution always used the crutch of "FSD Not Available, Right hand Camera is Blocked" messaging and "Driver Supervision" as the backstop to any failure anywhere in the stack. Waymo had no choice but to solve the expensive problem of "Always Available and Safe" and work backwards on price.
•
LIDAR is notoriously easy to blind, what are you on about? Bonus meme: LIDAR blinds you(r iPhone camera)!
I think Elon announced Tesla was ditching LIDAR in 2019.[0] This was before Mobileye offered LIDAR. Mobileye has used LIDAR from Luminar Technologies around 2022-2025. [1][2] They were developing their own lidar, but cancelled it. [3] They chose Innoviz Technologies as their LIDAR partner going forward for future product lines. [4] 0: https://techcrunch.com/2019/04/22/anyone-relying-on-lidar-is-doomed-elon-musk-says/ 1: https://static.mobileye.com/website/corporate/media/radar-lidar-fact-sheet.pdf 2: https://www.luminartech.com/updates/luminar-accelerates-commercial-momentum-with-mobileye-design-win 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vvg9heQObyQ&t=48s 4: https://ir.innoviz.tech/news-events/press-releases/detail/135/mobileye-to-use-innoviz-lidars-for-its-mobileye-drive-av
•
Never with the product used by Tesla early on.
https://www.mobileye.com/news/mobileye-to-end-internal-lidar-development/ Um, yes they did. No idea if it had any relation to Tesla though.
•
Did not
The inputs to FSD are: 7 cameras x 36fps x 5Mpx x 30s 48kHz audio Nav maps and route for next few miles 100Hz kinematics (speed, IMU, odometry, etc) Source: https://youtu.be/LFh9GAzHg1c?t=571
•
Fog, heavy rain, heavy snow, people running between cars or from an obstructed view… None of these technologies can ever be 100%, so we’re basically accepting a level of needless death. Musk has even shrugged off FSD related deaths as, “progress”.
•
Humans: 70 deaths in 7 billion miles FSD: 2 deaths in 7 billion miles Looks like FSD saves lives by a margin so fat it can probably survive most statistical games.
Tesla went nothing-but-nets (making fusion easy) and Chinese LIDAR became cheap around 2023, but monocular depth estimation was spectacularly good by 2021. By the time unit cost and integration effort came down, LIDAR had very little to offer a vision stack that no longer struggled to perceive the 3D world around it. Also, integration effort went down but it never disappeared. Meanwhile, opportunity cost skyrocketed when vision started working. Which layers would you carve resources away from to make room? How far back would you be willing to send the training + validation schedule to accommodate the change? If you saw your vision-only stack take off and blow past human performance on the march of 9s, would you land the plane just because red paint became available and you wanted to paint it red? I wouldn't completely discount ego either, but IMO there's more ego in the "LIDAR is necessary" case than the "LIDAR isn't necessary" at this point. FWIW, I used to be an outspoken LIDAR-head before 2021 when monocular depth estimation became a solved problem. It was funny watching everyone around me convert in the opposite direction at around the same time, probably driven by politics. I get it, I hate Elon's politics too, I just try very hard to keep his shitty behavior from influencing my opinions on machine learning.
•
depth estimation is but one part of the problem— atmospheric and other conditions which blind optical visible spectrum sensors, lack of ambient (sunlight) and more. lidar simply outperforms (performs at all?) in these conditions. and provides hardware back distance maps, not software calculated estimation
Interesting question. If the Waymo was driving aggressively to remove us from the situation but relatively safely I might stay in it. This does bring up something, though: Waymo has a "pull over" feature, but it's hidden behind a couple of touch screen actions involving small virtual buttons and it does not pull over immediately. Instead, it "finds a spot to pull over". I would very much like a big red STOP IMMEDIATELY button in these vehicles.
•
I feel like this ends with drunk morons accidentally creating Waymo barricades and totally ruining Mardi Gras
•
Imagine how many drunk/careless passengers might press it. Stopping in the middle of the street or highway could be a serious safety hazard.
This is 3D LiDAR output (multimodal) from 2D images.
•
LiDAR is the technology used to do spatial capture. The output is just point clouds of surfaces. So they’re generating surface point clouds from video
Human depth perception uses stereo out to only about 2 or 3 meters, after which the distance between your eyes is not a useful baseline. Beyond 3m we use context clues and depth from motion when available.
•
ok, but a care is a few meters wide, isn't that enough for driving depth perception similar to humans
•
The depths you are trying to estimate are to the other cars, people, turnings, obstacles, etc. Could be 100m away or more on the highway.
Ad blocking is alive and well, despite Chrome's attempts to make it harder (theregister.com)
•
anyone have a suggestion for a good ad blocker for chrome?
If I wanted to make ad blocking hard, I'd first keep serving an easily blockable ad system while getting everyone used to extension API which only can block such simple systems. Only once it is fully adopted, I could switch to hard to block system. Doing that in the opposite order would obviously harm adoption of my crippled extension API and push users to competing browsers which kept supporting the advanced API.
•
But that assumes that you are controlling API and ad system as well or you are able to coordinate those two. I am not sure if even Google is able to do that despite owning both.
Call me cynical, but from the comments online, I think this research is being used for propaganda marketing to push for MV3 adoption - to assuage the lay users that all the hue and cry is for nothing and they shouldn't abandon Chrome, and to provide an excuse for other browsers holding out to embrace MV3 completely. (Don't be surprised if Firefox suddenly changes its mind and decides to fully embrace MV3 and drop MV2). Here is the actual research - Privacy vs. Profit: The Impact of Google's Manifest Version 3 (MV3) Update on Ad Blocker Effectiveness - https://arxiv.org/html/2503.01000v2 > This study comes with several limitations ... this study faces limitations related to the dynamic behavior of websites and extensions ... Second, consistent with previous research, the automated browser-based experiment does not replicate all aspects of user interactions, such as visiting sub-pages of a website’s homepage, which introduce different trackers than the website’s homepage ... Third, the study explores ad blocker effectiveness using a European IP address and default ad blocker settings on a select sample of websites, focusing on display ads. As a result, the web’s long tail is under-represented. Consequently, we cannot rule out that MV3’s 30,000-rule limit could disproportionately affect less popular websites that rely on rarely used rule ... Because EU traffic often involves GDPR-driven website changes that reduce third-party activity irrespective of consent, baseline ad and tracker counts are lower ... Fourth, our study cannot exclude that any future changes to the Chrome extension ecosystem might hinder ad blocker effectiveness, as feared by some ad blocker providers ... Note that the intent of this study was to determine if MV3 ad-blockers are as effective as MV2 based ad-blockers. Nobody has said that MV3 cannot be used to block ads or trackers. What they have always criticised is that it makes it harder to do so than MV2, and the difficulty of implementing dynamic filtering with it gives the advertisers an upper hand over adblockers. When the ad-block extension developers tell you that MV3 cripples their extension and makes it harder to block ads and trackers in your browser, who are you going to believe - the experts at blocking ads and trackers or a corporate who makes its money from data harvesting and online advertising and has a real incentive to cripple ad-blocking on browsers?
•
> What they have always criticised is that it makes it harder to do so than MV2, and the difficulty of implementing dynamic filtering with it gives the advertisers an upper hand over adblockers. it's more than this the filter list is now bundled in extension, which has to be approved by Google so they're now the gatekeepers of the filter list updates so to stop youtube adblockers, all they have to do is: - design a countermeasure - deploy it - don't approve updates until the next countermeasure is ready and repeat you'd never be able to block a youtube ad again
↙ time adjusted for second-chance
The Monad Called Free (blog.sigfpe.com)
It's serendipitous that I'm seeing this blog post on the front page today, because I'm currently writing an article discussing the free monad. In addition to the free monad presented in this post, there is a variant, called the "freer" monad, based on the "bind" operation instead of the "join" operation: data Freer f a where Pure :: a -> Freer f a Bind :: f a -> (a -> Freer f b) -> Freer f b I believe this definition originates from the following paper by Oleg Kiselyov and Hiromi Ishii: https://okmij.org/ftp/Haskell/extensible/more.pdf When thinking of monads as giving the semantics of some computational strategy, it's easier to define them in terms of "bind" instead of "join." This way of defining monads is sometimes called a "Kleisli triple" because it is better suggestive of "Kleisli arrows," or functions of the signature `a -> m b`. The "bind" operation defines how to compose a monadic computation with its continuation, and from this perspective, the "freer" monad resembles an abstract syntax tree. Originally, Eugenio Moggi proposed monads as a technique for specifying the denotational semantics of programming languages. All Java programs "really" happen in the IO + Either monads, because all Java programs may perform IO and throw exceptions. To my understanding, free monads are the monad that OCaml 5 runs in, because they give the semantics for effect handlers (or resumable exceptions).
•
> All Java programs "really" happen in the IO + Either monads People say things like this all the time, and I think it's a vacuous assertion. While there is probably some very narrow view where returning early with an error, throwing an exception, and binding in Either are the same thing, such a view ignores a lot of important context (e.g. all of imperative programming). This is why you have to qualify it as "IO + Either", but that doesn't say anything at all because everything is possible in IO.
Right. I don't know how many times I've been exasperated by how monads are perceived as difficult. Do you understand "flatmap"? Good, that's literally all a monad is: a flatmappable. Technically it's also an applicative functor, but at the end of the day, that gives us a few trivial things: - a constructor (i.e., a way to put something inside your monad, exactly how `[1]` constructs a list out of a natural number) - map (everyone understands this bc we use them with lists constantly) - ap, which is basically just "map for things with more than one parameter" Monads are easy . But when you tell someone "well it's a box and you can unwrap it and modify things with a function that also returns a box, and you unwrap that box take the thing out and put it inside the original box— No. It is a flatmappable. That's it. Can you flatmap a list? Good. Then you already can use the entirety of monad-specific properties. When you start talking about Maybe, Either, etc. then you've moved from explaining monads to explaining something else. It's like saying "classes are easy" and then someone says "yeah well what about InterfaceOrienterMethodContainerArrangeableFilterableClass::filter" that's not a class! That's one method in a specific class. Not knowing it doesn't mean you don't understand classes. It just means you don't have the standard library memorized!
•
Forget programming, everyday business and physics is monadic in function. And if-then statements are functorial. These are very general thought patterns.
> Do you understand "flatmap"? Good, that's literally all a monad is: a flatmappable. Awesome! Now I understand. > Technically it's also an applicative functor Aaaand you've lost me. This is probably why people think monads are difficult. The explanations keep involving these unfamiliar terms and act like we need to already know them to understand monads. You say it's just a flatmappable, but then it's also this other thing that gives you more?
•
I mean people need to be familiar with mathematics. In mathematics things form things without having to understand them. For example, The natural numbers form a ring and field over normal addition and multiplication , but you don't need to know ring theory to add numbers.. People need to stop worrying about not understanding things. No one understands everything.
•
But words like "incapsulation" or "polymorphism" or even "autoincrement" also sound unfamiliar and scary to a young kid who encounters them the first time. But the kid learns their meaning along the way, in a desire to build their own a game, or something. The feeling that one already knows a lot, sort of enough, and it'd be painful and boring to learn another abstract thing is a grown-up problem :-\
It's also important to note that in Haskell and other functional programming languages, there is no implied order of operations. You need a Monad type in order to express that certain things are supposed to happen after other things. Monads can also express that certain things happen "in between" two operations, which is why we have different kinds of Monads and mathematical axioms of what they're all supposed to do. Outside of FP however, this seems really stupid. We're used to operations that happen in the order you wrote them in and function applications that just so happen to also print things to the screen or send bits across the network. If you live in this world, like most people do, then "flatmap" is a good metaphor for Monads because that's basically all they do in an imperative language[1]. Well, that, and async code. JavaScript decided to standardize on a Monad-shaped "thenable" specification for representing asynchronous processes, where most other programming languages would have gone with green threads or some other software-transparent async mechanism. To be clear, it's better than the callback soup you'd normally have[0], but working with bare Thenables is still painful. Just like working with bare Monads - which is why Haskell and JavaScript both have syntax to work around them (await/async, do, etc). Maybe/Either get talked about because they're the simplest Monads you can make, but it makes Monads sound like a spicy container type. [0] The FP people call this "continuation-passing style" [1] To be clear, Monads don't have to be list-shaped and most Monads aren't.
•
There is an implied order of operations in Haskell. Haskell always reduces to weak head normal form. This implies an ordering. Monads have nothing to do with order (they follow the same ordering as Haskell's normalization guarantees). > JavaScript decided to standardize on a Monad-shaped "thenable" specification for representing asynchronous processes, Its impossible for something to be monad shaped. All asynchronous interfaces form a monad whether you decide to follow the Haskell monad type class or decide to do something else. They're all isomorphic and form a monad. Any model of computation forms a monad. Assembly language quite literally forms a category over the monoid of endo functors. Jacquard loom programming also forms a category over the monoid of endo functors because all processes that sequence things with state form such a thing, whether you know that or not. It's like claiming the Indians invented numbers to fit the addition algorithm. Putting the cart before the horse, because all formations of the natural numbers form a natural group/ring with addition and multiplication formed the standard way (they also all form separate groups and rings, that we barely ever use).
> You need a Monad type in order to express that certain things are supposed to happen after other things This is the kind of explanation that drives me absolutely batshit crazy because it is fundamentally at odds with: > Do you understand "flatmap"? Good, that's literally all a monad is: a flatmappable. So, I think I understand flatmap, assuming that this is what you mean: https://www.w3schools.com/Jsref/jsref_array_flatmap.asp But this has absolutely nothing to do with "certain things are supposed to happen after other things", and CANNOT POSSIBLY have anything to do with that. Flatmap is a purely functional concept, and in the context of things that are purely functional, nothing ever actually happens . That's the whole point of "functional" as a concept. It cleanly separates the result of a computation from the process used to produce that result. So one of your "simple" explanations must be wrong.
•
Because you're not used to abstract algebra. JavaScript arrays form a monad with flatmap as the join operator. There are multiple ways to make a monad with list like structures. And you are correct. Monads have nothing to do with sequencing (I mean any more than any other non commutative operator -- remember x^2 is not the same as 2^x) Haskell handles sequencing by reducing to weak head normal form which is controlled by case matching. There is no connection to monads in general. The IO monad uses case matching in its implementation of flatmap to achieve a sensible ordering.
NIMBYs aren't just shutting down housing (inpractice.yimbyaction.org)
"People would rather stay marooned in the middle of an endless desert of houses with essentials being a 30-45m drive away." Not my preference but also not out of bounds as a democratic outcome. If we want our respect for democracy to be taken seriously we need to respect democratic outcomes ... even when they are not the ones we prefer .
•
How about if your neighborhood wanted to keep out people of a certain ethnicity instead? Is that a democratic outcome that we need to respect? The definition of democracy is that we hold regular elections for political office. It does not mean that every single decision in society is up for a vote at the local level. 51% of my neighbors cannot decide that they'd like expropriate my house or checking account. The point of YIMBYism is that these kinds of decisions have negative externalities and a larger group of voters- at the state or national level- are removing that decision-making power from a smaller group at the local level. This is a democratically legitimate outcome!
I always find this 'character' argument disingenuous. The character of the neighbourhood is only invoked for perceived negative externalities. No one complains when the cracked sidewalks get repaved, or fiber internet lines replace slow copper, when increasing affluence mean that houses are better maintained, when a new sewer line allows people to remove septic tanks. That all changes the character of a neighbourhood, but never gets fought. Go ahead and commit to the bit, lock in on the character in ALL ways: make sure you fight any alteration to any building, any change in the shade of paint should be fought! Your neighbour replacing their front door? Denied! Replacing a concrete driveway with pavers? unacceptable? Replacing incandescent bulbs with LED? Uncharacteristic! Increasing home values changing who can afford to live there? Not acceptable, gotta sell your home for what you paid to maintain the character! > If someone moves into an area that is zoned for particular types of properties, then new zoning is imposed by outside fiat (not a vote of the people who live there) is not appropriate. How small are we going to allow the "area" to be defined? Is it one vote per property owner, or one vote per resident? Can we call a block an area? Who decides the arbitrary boundaries? Do people living on the boundary line get to vote for projects in adjacent properties in adjacent jurisdictions? Just call NIMBYism what it is, selfish justification for control of other people's property. Your position is - explicitly - that other people and property owners should be made less well off for your comfort. "The Character of the Neighbourhood" is a red herring.
•
Doesn't seem disingenuous. Some places still have "character" in a world increasingly turning into the same strip malls and cookie cutter suburbs. In most small to mid size towns in the US, you can't really tell where you're at without reading signs. They all trend towards the same generic look with the same generic stores. Some towns fight this with varying degrees of success. But the Dollar Generals will not be stopped. One example that springs to mind for me is Pasadena, CA and their trees. They are (or were) very NIMBY about things which would impact their trees. And I can't blame them. It's one of the few areas in the valley with significant shade thanks to their investment and protection of trees. Their roads were planned around mature existing trees instead of cutting them down as is so common. There's no doubt that Pasadena could have more dense housing if they cut down more trees to make room. It also doesn't seem at all disingenuous to feel like that would be a loss for the "character" of the city and a negative for the collective residents due to rising temperatures and loss of shade.
Many prominent Republicans in recent years have railed against censorship and espoused a strong belief in free speech principles. Then they got back into power last year and most of those same people did a complete 180 and have been happily supporting censorship of speech that they don't like.
•
Here is where I would normally ask you: > Can you name one such individual and give examples of each phenomenon? But it seems that you conflate "Republicans" who are actually members of government with people who simply support the party; and anyway the concept of "free speech absolutism" is inherently not partisan. The existence of 1A defenders on either side of the aisle (or representing any niche interest) doesn't say anything about the existence of principled, consistent 1A defenders.
An Update on Heroku (heroku.com)
•
What are some good alternatives? Anyone any experience with https://sevalla.com/ ?
•
so EOL announcement without saying when it will be, but eventually. we've been loyal heroku customers for over a decade. should have switched off long ago, but as a small team, it was too valuable. such a shame.
•
Wow, I have to admit that I have not heard anyone in the past 2 years or so to be on Heroku so it makes sense. I think they handled it quite well knowing that there most likely have been a steady decline of users. Generally I would avoid promoting myself but in this situation I think it fits the topic. I'm co-founder of a Platform-as-a-Service based in Europe named Ploi Cloud [0]. We focus on web applications working on NodeJS and PHP but would be open to other platforms if people need it. Heroku has always been a source of inspiration to me so if you are looking for an alternative and care about it having a strong European presence please check it out. (We do have a US location too!) 0: https://ploi.cloud
•
The downfall of Heroku should be studied, they had lightning in a bottle and blew it. Salesforce acquired them and just let it die, baffling.
•
Often seems like there's no defeat that Benioff can't steal from the jaws of Victory.
•
I've been using DigitalOcean App Platform for a while now. It's not a 1:1 Heroku replacement, but the git-based deploys, managed DBs, and ability to move to Droplets later without a big migration have worked very well for me.
Do you have any public docs on how y'all migrate customers out of Heroku Postgres without downtime? Seems to be the sticking point for a lot of people, myself included.
•
hey! northflank supports the same buildpacks that you run on Heroku, so it should be fairly straightforward. we have these docs for a more detailed walkthrough: 1/ https://northflank.com/docs/v1/application/migrate-from-heroku 2/ https://northflank.com/blog/how-to-migrate-from-heroku-a-step-by-step-guide
How does render compare to fly.io? Does anyone has experience running production rails apps on these?
•
https://render.com/articles/render-vs-fly-io
It really surprises me there isn’t a modern heroku alternative that supports the same.. things. Like build pipelines, routing included, multiple worker types. AWS is way less batteries included. And none of the competitors seems to offer the same kind of service, last time I looked.
•
northflank comes close
From a business perspective, this means they will not be investing in innovation on the platform anymore. Instead, they will focus their efforts on maintaining the current operations and keeping the lights on.
•
From a business perspective the have brought it out to the field with a shotgun.
Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS (github.com/microsoft)
•
Library Operating System (LibOS) is a type of operating system that runs in the address space of applications, allowing for a small, fixed set of abstractions to connect the library OS to the host OS kernel. This approach offers the promise of better system security and more rapid independent evolution of OS components. LibOS can run significant applications, such as Microsoft Excel, PowerPoint, and Internet Explorer, with significantly lower overhead than a full VM. It can also address many of the current uses of hardware virtual machines at a fraction of the overheads. 1 LibOS is lightweight, with extremely short startup time, and can be used to run Linux programs, making it a versatile option for various applications. It is designed to provide compatibility and sandboxing without the need for VMs, making it a lightweight alternative to containers and VMs. 1 The Library Operating System for Linux was announced on the Linux kernel mailing list, indicating its official recognition and support within the Linux community.
> I've become increasingly paranoid about running any application on Windows (not that your average linux distro is even remotely better) Linux excels over Windows in the area of security by a wide margin, I have no qualms about running an app on Linux versus Windows, any day of the week.
•
> Linux excels over Windows in the area of security by a wide margin No, this is wrong but might be true if you are talking about Linux package manager vs. Random Windows .exe on internet. But if you are talking about Secure Boot, encrypted disk, sudo etc. Windows is more secure but it looks like https://amutable.com/ will make Linux more secure like Windows. Edit: Some insecure things on Linux: Dbus (kwallet etc.), sudo, fprint, "secure boot".
With how buggy their flagship OS has become, why would I trust anything else they release to be better? Or even if it does work well now, why should I expect it to stay that way? Microsoft has burned through all possible goodwill at this point, at least for me.
•
Microsoft US a massive corporation with so many people, business units, departments. A comment like yours is just like saying: "I know a buggy open-source software, why would I trust that other open-source project? The open-source community burned all possible goodwill".
>Kernel and low level stuff are actually very stable and good. This. A while ago a build of Win 11 was shared/leaked that was tailored for the Chinese government called "Windows G" and it had all the ads, games, telemetry, anti-malware and other bullshit removed and it flew on 4GB RAM. So Microsoft CAN DO IT, if they actually want to, they just don't want to for users. You can get something similar yourself at home running all the debloat tools out there but since they're not officially supported, either you'll break future windows updates, or the future windows updates will break your setup, so it's not worth it.
•
Microsoft should just open source Windows at this point.
Windows 11 is running on my ThinkPad T530. Its CPU is very nearly 14 years old. What is missing here that was present when this same computer was running Windows 10?
•
>Windows 11 is running on my ThinkPad T530. Its CPU is very nearly 14 years old. Yes, you can bypass HW checks to install it on a pentium 4 if you want, nothing new here. >What is missing here that was present when this same computer was running Windows 10? All the security features I listed in the comment above.
From the GitHub page: LiteBox is a sandboxing library OS that drastically cuts down the interface to the host, thereby reducing attack surface. It focuses on easy interop of various "North" shims and "South" platforms. LiteBox is designed for usage in both kernel and non-kernel scenarios. LiteBox exposes a Rust-y nix/rustix-inspired "North" interface when it is provided a Platform interface at its "South". These interfaces allow for a wide variety of use-cases, easily allowing for connection between any of the North--South pairs. Example use cases include: - Running unmodified Linux programs on Windows - Sandboxing Linux applications on Linux - Run programs on top of SEV SNP - Running OP-TEE programs on Linux - Running on LVBS
•
is this wslv1.2 (wslv1 redux) in now a more general cross-platform library firewall type thing?
Hackers (1995) Animated Experience (hackers-1995.vercel.app)
•
So friggin’ cool. Well done.
•
I wish there was a way to straighten myself out after I drag with the mouse or use the A/D keys to move left or right. I was expecting to be able to turn left or right, and weave through the servers (or whatever they are), as opposed to drifting left/right and eventually getting stuck.
•
I highly recommend Hackers Curator for fans of the movie [0] Outstanding interviews with cast and crew, prop projects, etc. [0] https://hackerscurator.com
•
YO THIS IS ZERO COOL!
•
The 1990s depiction of a filesystems in movies like Hacker or Disclosure was just weird. Then you had products like Microsoft Bob.
"im a real wild child i'm a wild one, im a wild one!!"
•
"I'm not an addict. Can I get some more coffee?"
I like Wargames much more. Still, people is right that we should take the 'hacking' (cracking) scenes artistically, as a metaphor on what's happening inside the mind of a cracker.
•
If a movie ever had the balls to show real hacking people would see how utterly f cking boring and uncool it looks. It’s like prog rock. By and large, hot chicks are interested in bands like Motley Crue and Bon Jovi. But prog rock never got chicks wet. It was always music by nerds for other nerds. I think a realistic movie about hacking would be the same. By and large.
OK who is gonna turn this into a functional terminal emulator for me?
•
Not exactly, there is cool retro term: https://github.com/Swordfish90/cool-retro-term
"RISC architecture is gonna change everything." :)
•
Me: [thinking about how to get with the hot Romulan looking chick] Me also: yah RISC is good!
> Never fear, I is here. > Out of the way you hapless techno weenie.
•
The little boat tipped over.
Hack the planet!
•
We have no names, man. No names. We are nameless.
Awhile I made something really dumb: https://www.warpstream.com/etc/terminal you can enter a 'gibson' command.
•
Nice touch with the IP :D
There's another two soundtracks! https://www.discogs.com/release/1423591-Various-Hackers%C2%B2 https://www.discogs.com/release/131024-Various-Hackers%C2%B3
•
Thanks, what a great resource discogs is. Here's the 1st one for completeness: https://www.discogs.com/release/29127-Various-Hackers-Original-Motion-Picture-Soundtrack
> "tfile kids" Not familiar with that term, and my googling has failed. What does it refer to?
•
http://textfiles.com/ people familiar with the culture
 Top