Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | positron26's commentslogin

I suppose we will tell them to vote for better laws?

That last few years of being under 18 can feel completely immoral. "Study hard. Learn skills you will need in life." Meanwhile GPA inflation from unconcerned minders of public institutions will put food on their own table, so accessing anything that will actually move your life ahead will generally require money or ingenuity.

Piracy isn't my religion, but I find it a critical relief valve protecting individual self-determination, especially for young people. Over-centralization of capability into hosted services creates a wall for a problem that needed more relief valves.


The point of language servers is to support all editors that speak LSP.


Zed is an editor that requires you to still write a tiny plugin basically telling it how to download and start the server, unlike something like emacs where this is just user config


Internet is dead.


Huh, first time getting called a bot for me. I assume it’s the “Zed is an editor”, I was originally going to say something like “Zed is one of those editors like VScode that requires plugins for LSPs” and then shortened it


No, even the humans are dead.

Both the "user configuration" and the library are configuration masquerading as code. One is dynamically evaluated, the other compiled.

I just figure users of Zed know this... so what are we pretending to talk about?


Lol. In 2015 boring technology is at the hands of your PM spinning up some agent spam. Bury this pile of outdated thinking. Go hard at the most difficult programming you can find or go home.


8 is serious. 9 is Pacific subduction rupture.

7 is not really top news of the day.

People with friends and family exposed don't really appreciate being false-alarmed with 7s and 6s.


I'm sure everyone in the hospital and with collapsed houses would agree with your assessment that it's not a big deal.


Okay. Let's make every such instance news?

HN is exaggerating to feel close to the action. It's childish.

There is a trench off of Tokyo that is likely to rupture in our lifetimes, and people who have other people to check on don't care about HN's disaster fantasies.


273 people died from a 7.0 earthquake in Kumamoto in 2016.


Is that the earthquake in question? No. So your hair-splitting is motivated by what again? Rationalizing HN overreacting so that people can be entertained? Everyone here is "winning" an online argument with zero regard for the false alarm all the karma farming causes.


The HN audience decides what is top news of the day, that’s the whole principle this website is based upon


Bill Gureley's talk on regulation comes to mind: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9cO3-MLHOM&t=1447s

The reason barking at open source will only get the dog thrown into the river is because there is a whole lot more cumulative power distributed among companies and consumers who don't want two incumbents to dictate which kinds of alternatives can exist.

Note that those rushing to the "all corpos evil" talking points will turn around and advocate delegating these decisions to "the government." This is the same government that they also claim is bought by the corporations. It's also the same government that will enforce the regulatory capture on behalf of the yucky corporation against the broad, diverse interests.

Thinking big vs small while embracing the biggest of the big is some kind of inconsistency that people need to deal with by looking in the mirror and finding some awareness. Nuance. If your problem model is wrong, so is every solution you propose except if your wrong model may get lucky from time to time. Not every broken model is a broken clock. Some broken models cannot admit the right answer ever.

The real dynamic on display here is broad, correlated mass of overlapping interests, big and small. The big pile of people and entities that don't want to be governed by OpenAI and Anthropic can push harder and win the tug of war. You don't have to like your temporary allies all the time, but at least know who they are and when you are aligned.


It can't be one language, and that's the big problem. It's inescapably a bunch of tiny DSLs. Once you see both the inconsistency and the necessity for inconsistency, it becomes much easier to just roll with it.


Would like to hear the rest of this story. Don't have an X account atm.


Xcancel is your friend.


Explanation: just change x.com to xcancel.com in any URL. It's a public instance of Nitter.


Just like how the web was won?

I think Mozilla is chasing a past formula, but the projection isn't linear enough to remain consistent, and the critical parts of the outcome, utter centralization of the market dominance of the three C's, are left out of the equation.

We might get the consolation prize, a few nerds having competitive alternatives to applaud, but we will be left with the hidden costs: stagnation by bloated market leaders, consumers and businesses pouring trillions of dollars into the commercial offerings while open development wonders where money comes from, and the leakage of these imbalances into political and social spheres.

If we follow a Mozilla template and get to the peak of Mozilla's success at the web, look at what that really is. Facebook, Amazon, Google etc are orthogonal to that equation.


The algorithm advances are going to crash this so hard.


Or will more efficient algorithms just mean we run even more AI models, increasing the demand for AI chips even more?


I heard Greg Brockman on a podcast saying they are limited by computer and memory. They have line of sight in solving many different kinds of problems. But they also have to survive in the meantime. Hence the focus on enterprise recently. They could just ask Government to fund them doing other research areas


Better algos = more demand

Memory squeeze will get worse before it gets better.


I mean, god willing, but it'll be just as likely that we'll blissfully consume 100 million token contexts in that case.


isn't there a law for that? as things become cheaper you consume more?


You're probably thinking about jevons paradox. But you slightly mis-stated. It is the phenomenon that increasing the efficiency of resource consumption can end up increasing total consumption.

As you stated it, it would merely be a property of (nearly) all demand curves. Jevons paradox only happens sometimes. It isn't a law.


An example of where it stopped happening is with gasoline in developed countries. Cars having better fuel efficiency doesn’t make me drive further to the grocery store or work.

Generally when someone replaces their vehicle the new one is more fuel efficient than the old one even if I bought the same car.




jevons paradox


classic uneducated algo copium talk


> their own arbitrary reasons

Outside pressure behind much of it.

In any case, there's a fundamental mismatch between pressure groups and the leverage they can exert through single-consensus. I don't know how to describe the other consensus that is on my brain, but it is distinct.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: