blandcoffee

I appreciate the direction of this article, and commend the author on publishing work, but the first sentence in the first paragraph is exactly what they lament.

> A pattern I see is that people use AI to build something new, then they use AI to retrospectively summarize what they have already built into a design document. Reading a document like this isn’t just difficult—it is punishing.

This article mentions the allegations, but you can also read them directly here:

https://cims.nyu.edu/~tristanb/statement.pdf

On IOS 26.3.1 - settings > notifications > signal

Show previews is set to Never (Default).

I ask this with sincere curiosity - what does his current place of residence have to do with his message that programmers should avoid companies building infrastructure for the police state?

Do you think this might be tied to a person’s financial situation?

Grow up with a safety net, you’ll enjoy the process.

Grow up poor and/or with people depending on you and you focus on the end state?

Did you read the complaint?

If the honeypot description is accurate, the wolf is real. The below is from section 5 of their complaint [1]:

> Rippling’s General Counsel sent a legal letter to Deel’s senior leadership identifying a recently established Slack channel called “d-defectors,”

> In reality, the “d-defectors” channel was not used by Rippling employees and contained no discussions at all. It had never been searched for or accessed by the spy, would not have come up in any of the spy’s previous searches, and the spy had no legitimate reason to access the channel. Crucially, this legal letter was only sent to three recipients, all associated with Deel: Deel’s Chairman, Chief Financial Officer, and General Counsel (Philippe Bouaziz), Deel’s Head of U.S. Legal (Spiros Komis), and Deel’s outside counsel. Neither the letter nor the #d-defectors channel was known to anyone outside of Rippling’s investigative team and the Deel recipients. Yet, just hours after Rippling sent the letter to Deel’s executives and counsel, Deel’s spy searched for and accessed the #d-defectors channel

[1] https://rippling2.imgix.net/Complaint.pdf

You may be right, but I think China specifically has learned something from Russia.

Before invading Ukraine, Russia held assets across the world and they were frozen (some of it USD).

Now imagine you are a large holder of US treasuries, would you take some off the table and purchase this other asset (gold) that can ensure you're less susceptible to your enemies sanctions?

I think perhaps you may have misread the article.

Here are some items that stuck out to me:

> As for American gold holdings, they’re essentially pointless: Fort Knox is a legacy of the days when the U.S. promised to exchange gold for dollars on demand.

> More to the point, bitcoin was created to be an alternative to the dollar, not a support for it. Far from strengthening the dollar, having the U.S. purchase billions of dollars of assets that were created to be alternatives to the dollar would at best be economically pointless and at worst would actually weaken confidence in the dollar.

so why other than fort knox, are you advocating for this position?

In the article it says:

> Sacks said that he has sold his personal crypto holdings.

I went to his twitter account, that's exactly what he said, but that does not mean the same thing as divesting from companies that hold crypto.

[flagged]

> Finally, it is not sufficient to have an army of parachute ninjas large or smart to drop into all the agencies in the executive branch. Many institutions of power are outside the government proper. Ninjas will have to land on the roofs of these buildings too—mainly journalism, academia and social media.

The author is quoting Yarvin's substack here.

Say what you will about reducing the federal workforce - are people really ok with this line of thinking?

The idea of running the govt in 'founder mode' sounds reasonable on paper, until you realize there are established rules that outline the roles of each branch of govt in a democracy. We should be ok that these rules don't establish the most efficient govt, a worthy trade-off against the edge-cases.

> “We should treat Trump and members of his administration like Elon Musk as akin to Russian oligarchs,” Macfarlane wrote. “We need to impose meaningful costs on the U.S. for its economic aggression.”

The most meaningful cost you could impose in this situation is to establish a direction in which innovation within your borders rivals that of your aggressors, so you are not beholden to the government of their day.

Interesting - I genuinely want to understand your perspective here.

Are you saying following the laws to protect sensitive information is not worth it in this case, because it has been authorized by the party of the day?

Does anyone else find it odd, that this type of access would typically require training and/or a background check, yet here we are 12 days after this administration was sworn in?

Are there no checks and balances in place? Seems like one side that won the popular vote has taken the entire spectrum of action, regardless if they need to govern for an entire nation.

Recently the protonmail founder has come out for republicans on antitrust enforcement - you can view some recent discussion here:

https://old.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/1i2nz9v/on_poli...

I appreciate a response like this on HN.

IF there is a problem, let's solve the root issue (which may include looking at the algo feeds of all big tech, etc).

I will not comment on the European data here, but this is so wrong on the Canada side.

Sentiment against immigration is real in Canada. You're comparing refugee numbers when in reality Canada's population grew faster than most of the G7 in 2023 [1]

[1] - https://www.scotiabank.com/ca/en/about/economics/economics-p...

This policy needs a refresh - there are many issues with the H1B program today - a good article if you're interested: https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2024-staffing-firms-game-...

We should be wary billionaires are controlling these policies.

Bernie Sanders did this interview a decade ago and he was right, unchecked immigration is not in the economic interest of the working class.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf-k6qOfXz0

This topic reminds me of the old interview Bernie Sanders gave nearly a decade ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf-k6qOfXz0

I hope citizens wake up, business interests are not always aligned with your (citizen) economic interest. It doesn't matter if it's legal or illegal immigration, there are economic realities that we should talk about - stop focusing on the color of someones skin.

| I think Elon and Vivek's comments are more nuanced than they are taken.

If they are, they have the platform to provide that nuance. Take a look at the public H1B data for Tesla (disclaimer it doesn't tell the full story), it does not seem like they are vying for the top-99.9%.

It seems odd we're giving billionaires the benefit of the doubt. They are positioning themselves to win, and that's totally fine in the system we're in, but let's not assume they are friends of the working class.

Is there no balance we can strive to hit?

Seems weird to be ok with slave labour and poor practices, simply because you want to ignore the negative externalities and consume cheap things (ie. undermining local economic production).

Are the laws written such that companies as large as Nvidia have zero accountability over the destination of their products that may violate laws?

They don't need to track down every unit, but 20% of revenue ending up at a Singapore address might warrant some understanding of the end destination?

The article mentions return to office policies as a reason, but you have to wonder what the severance package was. Anecdotally, a company my friend works at just laid people off, and a majority of the ones that were not let go, wished that they were given the option.

You have to wonder if there's some interesting data with regards to tight (?) labour markets, policy that has nudged severance packages higher, etc.

Is this a sarcastic quip or are you able to expand on this?

I use a lot of serverless daily, handling events (even ML inference), and it seems to work great, but would love to understand the alternatives and your perspective.

I don't dispute your claim (and am personally swayed of the argument of technical > admin in most situations) - do you have data that shows this disparity?

Purely conjecture (which means absolutely nothing), I've always assumed that admin:faculty rates are similar, but the volume is where it matters (ie. 2x more admin:faculty in headcount).

Can you expand further on what you mean by this?

There might be a slight miscommunication here.

I downloaded the code from their repo, exported their pytorch model to onnx, and ran a prediction against it. Everything ran locally on my system (cpu, no cuda cores) and a prediction for the item to be annotated was made.

This was my first thought too - I'm starting to question it, because they do have a product. Whether they have fit, will be interesting to see. More than most of the hype seed rounds in 2021.

Can you clarify what you mean by separate system installs?

Today, I manage python via pyenv (local and global state) that let's me create infinite .venvs with different python versions.

What's the point of this vs. creating your own venv (python -m venv .venv) and having a much smaller library of intentional tools?