News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

Caracas288

Re:Show HN: High-quality duck audio synthesizer on Sunday October 18, 2026 @05:17AM (#50139377)
Lettuce and oats are some other foods.

The overcrowding can also allow bird flu to spread more easily.

Re:OpenAI breaches Medicare, Albanese reveals on Thursday September 24, 2026 @02:43AM (#49827059)
They are too big to fail, if these companies were to be sanctioned in a way that slows them down, major components of the economy would collapse.
The difference between

"We found aliens!"

And

"Aliens are out there!"

Re:Show HN: Art – draw one stroke, let symmetry complete it on Thursday September 10, 2026 @12:53PM (#49646798)
Maybe they are talking about physical mandalas?
Re:Apple Watch Series 12 on Wednesday September 09, 2026 @06:32PM (#49635497)
Yeah, they're always leaving the Martians out!
Re:GPT-6 Astra, Looped Transformers, and Hidden Reasoning on Wednesday September 09, 2026 @03:55PM (#49633225)
Why doesn't someone just try to measure this next time!?
Re:Desert Ant Labs: local, fast models that run on device on Wednesday September 09, 2026 @09:50AM (#49626556)
Very much like map CD-rom updates, I think a lot of people wouldn't mind paying per-update for these models, and would understand the implications. That is, if there weren't so many open models available.
Re:ChatGPT Images 2.5 on Wednesday September 09, 2026 @05:43AM (#49623785)
Another example was the doc for GPT-5, which had all its graphs messed up, but they said it was human error rather than AI.
Re:On the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize Problem on Tuesday September 08, 2026 @05:35PM (#49617419)
If the training toggle is switched on, maybe OpenAI doesn't consider a chat to be private? Therefore making this a 'safe' statement.
Re:K2 Horizon: Frontier Performance, Radically Open on Friday September 04, 2026 @03:08AM (#49561459)
Exactly, and right now we have the worst of both worlds with companies blatantly ignoring copyright, but individuals prosecuted for violating it.
Re:EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype on Tuesday September 01, 2026 @02:38PM (#49526121)
I think there are better funding models than the precarity of copyright-dependent publishing.
Re:EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype on Tuesday September 01, 2026 @02:32PM (#49526025)
Not at all. You're presuming that nobody can be taken off this hypothetical salary once they're on it, and that they would be placed on it indiscriminately.

Simple safeguards are already in practice in today's economy to prevent such circumstances.

Re:EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype on Tuesday September 01, 2026 @01:45PM (#49525285)
Right, that was worded too universally, but this is what I mean: royalties here are supplementary to a salary, not a wage in themselves. The research was funded before publication.
Re:EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype on Tuesday September 01, 2026 @12:37PM (#49524360)
As with academics, inventors and artists should be paid for their labour long-term, not for their result.
Re:EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype on Tuesday September 01, 2026 @12:35PM (#49524331)
Academics don't collect any royalties, they're paid prior to publication, not for selling copies of books.
Re:EFF to Courts: Don't Rewrite Copyright over AI Hype on Tuesday September 01, 2026 @11:49AM (#49523653)
Authors and artists are not (and souldn't be) making Art for money. It is not a 'job' where effort goes in and product comes out. It's more like a religious calling, they often have no other option. That's true, but it's also the reason people are paid less than their technical peers.

It is difficult in the current climate to prevent industrial actors from cultivating genetic lines instantiated by Artists in Art. In a different future, the seperation between small and large-scale genetic agriculture would be recognised, and the abolition of copyright may proceed.

In a world where money is devalued, genetic lines and mental constituency will become even more powerful.

See: the mental constituency of sci-fi books in E. Musk's brain

Re:Racter (1984) on Monday August 31, 2026 @09:55PM (#49517062)
Ah yes, now that you point it out that sounds reasonable.

They missed a trick with their typeface, which could have made another nomative connection. Maybe Garamond just isn't web-safe enough.

Re:Racter (1984) on Monday August 31, 2026 @05:05AM (#49507384)
There's no way the connection isn't intentional!
Re:OpenAI JalapeñO: Better Than Nvidia Blackwell on Tuesday August 25, 2026 @05:41PM (#49441064)
Man wouldn’t it be cool to be able to slot a massive ROM AI chip into the external AI drive of the pc…
Re:ElevenLabs, TwelveLabs, ThirteenLabs on Saturday August 22, 2026 @04:36PM (#49403646)
There’s still time to get in on the ground floor! What an opportunity
The AIs are supposed to be very expensive, but it's left to the reader to figure out why—maybe it wouldn't work out that way in real life, but if the reader can't explore every part of the economic and technological space of the world (they can't), they become immersed within it, and allow the subconscious to come up with reasons for why such technologies exist in the story.

What's interesting in sci-fi at the time is that, because software wasn't fully solidified as a concept (nowhere near, in the case of Neuromancer) everything acts like a tool. What you buy stays just as it is, until it becomes obsolete. There's something quite appealing in that completeness. As you say, software is jarring in a way firmware isn't, and it lets developers be lazy.

As for toilets:

> Sometimes he resented having to leave the deck to use the chemical toilet they’d set up in a corner of the loft. - Neuromancer

...And he grew up in Shanghai, China
Re:c100 on Friday August 21, 2026 @11:47AM (#49389881)
Re:The Chauffeur Problem on Thursday August 20, 2026 @08:19AM (#49373610)
Ha! it pays to do a little research, I should have done so.

So it's something like 'Thought for the Day' on the radio...

Re:The Chauffeur Problem on Thursday August 20, 2026 @07:46AM (#49373312)
Definitely seems 20th century given the novelty around computers. The audio inclusion is beautiful, hardly see anything like that anywhere else, with music too.
Re:The Chauffeur Problem on Thursday August 20, 2026 @07:13AM (#49373049)
It’s formatted strangely… an excerpt from the book at the bottom of the page? The authors don’t match. Or maybe that footnote’s for the images…

It doesn’t need to be any longer; one of the ironic byproducts of our newest computer companions is that, even in the age of short-form content, they produce reams of rubbish, very rarely containing anything of consequence.

This, in contrast, is refreshing.

Re: on Friday July 10, 2026 @08:21PM (#48867082)
The other way around, surely? The ‘ghost’ being the soul, absent in purely robotic beings.

Yes, it’s hard to accept that for many, the notion of quality is conflated with uniformity of texture.

It’s a fun website nevertheless, interesting project.