Arnt

The price of gold was fixed in the US in that period. Gold lost buying power as the years passed.

Yeah, I want the assets I hold to increase in value, too, or at least not decrease.

Suppose you have some control over currency. You run a country. I'm that case, so you still want the currency to gain value compared to the alternatives?

Your choice is basically: holding currency is more profitable than building a house or running a business (or lending to those who do), or else less profitable. If you run a country, do you want houses and jobs and all that kind of thing, or do you want people to do better if they choose to hoard currency?

Sometimes it can be difficult to tell whether someone is a troll "just asking questions" or actually just asking that question. More so on HN than in most of the world, I mean.

I showed one of Wikipedia's AI samples to a friend, who answered at once: "that's exactly how the comms team at work writes."

Ah, I see. As for my personal neural network: I learned long division in school and got the best possible grade in maths, and I still don't think I had 99.63% accuracy on long division.

I'll suggest a possible answer: vetting customers is expensive, and if you don't vet, Spamhaus vets you.

Are neural networks ever 100% accurate?

I'm using Claude on APIs on which it was not trained, and it's doing well. The techniques it uses to debug and find solutions aren't that different from older APIs. "Let me dump all of this response and guess which field might be what" sometimes, "let me get a stack trace just before it goes wrong", many familiar development techniques.

I need to fill in timesheets, which uses a proprietary API. Claude guessed and iterated until it found out how to use that API, and filling in those sheets is now much less bothersome. I only need to enter a password every three days instead of four times per day.

He considers many possibilities, but not how many men died young on a battlefield somewhere.

Is this... existing DCs, or what could be built assuming that infinite building crews could build buildings and infinite amounts of RAM and GPUs could be installed in the buildings?

AFIACT, if I make a single request, the part that uses the most power is my monitors while they display the result and I read/use it.

Which makes me suspect that if I do something complex involving 2,000 requests, the power used is less than I'd use to achieve the same goal using my monitors and other office equipment. That depends on the goal of the complex action, of course.

$434M means something like "you can make a profit of $50m/year selling t-shirts etc, decreasing with time" which... wow. That seems wildly optimistic.

Fyi overhead often add anything up to 100% to the basic salary cost. Office space, hiring, travel, various forms of insurance, these things add up.

And serving DNS for the root or a big zone is technically challenging. You want 100% uptime despite DDoS attacks, that's not simple.

They needed more headroom under the bridge. The expensive part on the pictures you've seen is air.

There were hundreds of temporary supports, there were gas leaks and when they found a hand grenade from WW2 there was an expensive search for more surprises.

May I politely request a version for/against cockroaches?

Is does sounds as if China knows which tracking numbers are for interesting packages, doesn't it?

It may or may not be marginal.

For me now, its marginal.

For a past customer, not at all. That customer really cared about delivering image-heavy pages quickly. There was a fairly big difference in customer perception at a timing threshold.

Did an AI produce all that verbiage?

The short version seems to be: Slack's default configuration lets everyone with an email address at a particular domain sign up, which is fine for most companies but not suitable for non-paying users with gmail addresses. The ferment.fan poster thinks Slack should optimise for non-paying users instead of its company customers.

You are right, of course, and the curve won't really pass the 50% line on the graph for another few weeks or months.

But do you care about exactly when it passes?

In this case it's Element, which can certainly compete with Teams for unloveliness.

GP is saying of that if a particular job isn't well paid now, it won't be in the future. In other words, if you want to find a well-paid job in the future, look for the kind of job that's well-paid now. GP doesn't say why, but do you really wonder why?

Say you have a fancy printer and can print fake monthly passes. You can print a hundred fakes today "dated" November 23, valid for December 2026, and sell them until the end of November to people who can use them in December.

Ie. the end of the month November, not the end of December. I suppose you could also sell the remainder at a discount in December.

Yes, they're worth more.

A single ticket has to be printed and used in the space of a few hours. A monthly pass can be printed at any time and sold until the beginning of the month, for a much higher price. Much more risky for the transportation company.

So, if I read that correctly, they're promising that whatever Chromebooks run in 2035-6 will work on the hardware that was sold with ChromeOS in 25-26. And there'll be an upgrade path. Right? That's what they're saying?

It's even worse, you can learn 2000+ years old math on Youtube.

Are you saying that plutonium isn't nearly as poisonous as people claim, and watching for hairline cracks in containment walls is a waste of time?

Or something like that?

Nuclear has several major cost problems if it's own. Insuring against a major accident is prohibitively expensive, the kind of inspection+maintenance regime that's necessary for safety isn't amenable to cost reductions. The list goes on. Basically:

Nuclear isn't similar to the things that grow cheaper as the operators gain experience.

What do you think is a reasonable price/earnings ratio?

If you want an explanation: that kind of name-calling is an attempt to use your authority to diminish someone else's standing. It has up to two effects: it either diminishes that someone's standing, it diminishes yours, or both. I think the effect is decided mostly by how much authority you as writer have in the opinion of the audience.

If you don't have much, you risk a reaction such as "oh, that writer is just another name caller in the peanut gallery".