burgreblast

Exactly. Making money is a means to an end.

For those for whom making money is a primary goal, they miss their essential purpose in life.

> and you’re telling me that “Ok class, turn to page 17” and “Does anyone know how to solve for x” are still going to be around in the 2030s?

Nope, ship sailed. You haven’t had a child in school yet. It’s not like that anymore.

5 years ago in Palo Alto (Paly High) it was: Take your shoes off, get on your phone to watch a season of whatever you want, leave for “up to” 40 minutes. Paying attention to a teacher… who may have been teaching? or not? Why not just head over to the wellness center and get snacks? They let you hang out there.

Those IN CHARGE didn’t care to make learning matter or be rewarding. With AI, it “matters” less, in the credential-sense of schooling.

Institutions are meh. My bet is on individuals.

Google clutches pearls and is shocked! Shocked! That anyone would violate its policies (while it pockets 30% of the fraudulent revenue). Shocked!

And they would have caught them but those crafty criminals spoofed the user-agent. So how _could_ they know?

> Paper books are just decaying bundles of plant fiber

Enjoy notes the way you want!

But when I re-read a book I’ve previously annotated, I get a rush of the time and place it happened, 20 years later. It’s crazy.

We are tactile beings who exist and connect in 3D space and brains remember ideas in locations.

I love files. But I think strong entities are trying to rip control away, with stupid consequences like making .txt obsolete.

Books have a good chance outlast a)mediums and b)formats. They have a good track record. Check back in 5000 years.

You’re not claiming that most refugees are running from torture are you?

Most are economic refugees running TOWARDS a better economic outcome than is available in their home country.

Perhaps human teachers would model correct grammar?

vs "you like dinosaurs! me too!” From the blog post.

So a long article about them being kicked out and all they detail about their own actions is that "we asked him about it"? I'm not sure what "tacitly threatened" means, either.

If they want sympathy, they probably should lay out the details of their actions more clearly. This just reads as some juveniles went to an event, tried to rile up an official (while filming the response in hopes of getting a juicy clip), then were surprised when they were kicked out.

No disrespect for your valuable discovery but this attitude of “it’s possible, if you do these non-obvious steps” feels a lot like victim blaming in UI.

If Apple (or anyone else) wanted to make a feature used, they can. For everyone else, if Siri is off CarPlay doesn’t work. And that’s by design.

Not the design of “ooh if Siri is off then voice in CarPlay won’t work” (warnable), but punishment if Siri is off.

Again this pattern isn’t Apple only but it’s bad everywhere.

Thank you for noticing that Tesla's are priced at premium levels, but they still don't know how to make actual quality that is present the models you listed above. I've owned several of these and driven all but the EQS and there's a huuuge gap between a 7er S-class and a Tesla. Huge.

It broke with "tradition" because this was originally designed for Apple. Ive just recycled his previous Apple Car ideas.

This car has nothing to do with Ferrari, except they paid him for work he already did once before.

>This car is what the Apple Car should have been in the 2010s

This is the car apple was working on, slightly modified. Ive just (re)sold previous work, and Ferrari is holding the bag.

The reason this doesn't look like a Ferrari is because it was originally conceived as an Apple.

That's why the Ferrari tail lights don't work - it's an Apple car.

I'm afraid he has it actually inverted. What if the "sanctity of the prose" is just a old gloss, and the Taboola / Outbrain ads are the reality that don't hide the org's true character?

The printed version does _look_ better, but can org that serves Taboola ever be taken seriously anymore? Sanctity is miles away from "6 simple steps to $1 Million" ads. We can be sad in general about their passing. But let's not think it's isolated to issue surrounding online/ads. WaPo isn't the same either.

I don’t get this comment. Inspection does work but the suggested alternatives don’t.

Having the client register their IPs isn’t tenable for most folks. What’s my IP at the shop? (No idea) Will it change? (Yes) now it’s broken.

Seeing where folks log in from isn’t nearly the same as where their UniFi networks are located. (Store vs home.) Broken.

So neither of the those are robust approaches whereas the author’s solution is bulletproof and simply works in all cases.

No offense, but why suggest “other approaches” that have such major holes? Why not just cheer on the solution that works all the time?

melanzana aka Aubergine aka eggplant

If the author had been paying attention _while it was happening_, rather than looking back at history and re-stating it to fit his mental model, he would have seen something else.

Namely, the whole story of the rebound is Nicolas Hayek and Swatch. You see, at the explosion of quartz watches, everyone already had a drawer full of Rolexes and Pateks and AP's. They had done that. But telling time? More accurately? That was actually pretty boring.

Nicolas Hayek became a hero. It's fair to say, yes, he consolidated ASUAG + SSIH and built volume and all that. But really? It was about Emotion and redefining the Essential Function of a watch.

Swatch made Swiss watches cool again. The marketplace was saying Japan vs. Switzerland and quartz vs. old fashioned gears. Swatch rejected that and said "fun, whimsical. Wear not one, but several. You be you." What landed the message was wealthy Swiss keeping the Rolex in the drawer and believing in the the $19 Swatch. Aston Martin and Swatch. That was the way to roll.

It became a thing, the kids bought in, and the Swiss Watch Industry (Big Watch, lol) stayed relevant vs. Japan. It was a country vs. country fight and Swiss prevailed on creativity.

Swatch was such a watershed moment, tha that across Europe the key to Industrial Success became "Personalized Mass Production." Why? Because swatch quickly grew to be able to launch 2x70 models a year. The German Industrialists included personalized mass production and innovation in every slide deck for the next 20 years. And if you don't think that matters, look at Zara, and then Shein. Same playbook as Swatch. Swatch changed everything.

But ma, look at our stonk price!

I never get the moaning about killing Reader. It was never about popularity or user experience.

Reader had to be killed because it [was seen as] a suboptimal ad monetization engine. Page views were superior.

Was Google going to support minimizing ads in any way?

When you use Apple Pay, Apple collects ~0.15% (15 bps) from the issuing banks for credit. $1B in transaction volume = $1.5M

In 2022 the total volume was estimated at $6T * .15% = $9B. Real number would be maybe half due to lower fees on debit, but it's hugely profitable for Apple, and carries zero risk.

Why is collecting all this information suddenly OK as long as it's "only" used for Advertising purposes?

Is there a reason we also also forbid Google and FB from gathering this information? Or are their business models too important, and we can't decrease shareholder value?

Or since "the users" click-agreed the business model is absolved and it's okay! What could go wrong, ever?

Or, a modest proposal: we could agree that even corporations who sell HW/SW for personal devices shouldn't be allowed to collect this data, period. No one needs to mine our GPS history, messages, search, etc. Even if it means those who do it today makes less money.

Ads are fine, but maybe we agree it's fine if ads aren't quite as targeted, either.

I'm wondering if we might be better off with "punch the monkey" than hyper tracking and targeting.

Second oldest trick in the book: attack the messenger

But it's not "in reality". It's "with the mindsets and experience and architecture and tooling that are prevalent in the industry"...that's what takes more.

Any given project might not require large numbers people, the headcount driver might the process.

Where you have control, would recommend rethinking the model to look more like Whatsapp than to dismiss as an anomaly.

Good luck, I can imagine the cognitive dissonance. Many of their contracts dangle cheap / free hardware with expensive services and hidden over-priced processing in a bundled SAAS. And yet feature wise, it "does it all" except the very things you want it to do. (coursing and hybrid (open tab) ordering, and good guest experiences like apple pay on checkout). So you upgrade into something supposedly better but not actually what you wanted. If you get stuck, DM me (name in profile) and we can help you out with a full solution that actually does all the stuff. We've done >$1B orders so this is easy for us.

>a completely seamless order-and-pay-from-your-phone system because it doesn't exist.

(disclaimer: founder) Yes, this is literally what Zerocontact does. Contactless waitlist, menu, order, pay. Hybrid ordering so staff and guests can add items to one check. Fully supports courses. Add dessert at the end of th meal. Still, the customer has one check to pay (apple pay or google pay, or CC). We may even support your legacy POS or you can use ZC in standalone mode. It's a full order-management system for contactless on prem and off prem dining.

17 days ago we heard that 3,330 inmates tested positive, 96% without symptoms.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22980932

There was much speculation, but many people agreed that in 2 weeks we would have super interesting data.

It's been 17 days. We have an update from ohio.gov that tested individuals climbed to 7536, 4439 are positive (59%), total 49 deaths (.01)

Not an epidemiologist. Does this data fit the Diamond Princess model? Or more broadly, which model fits this data best?

Is there other data to show how many became symptomatic? How do we interpret this update, more than 2 weeks after initial reports?

Here's "Line busting" the drive thru 68+ cars deep. It's astonishing the WiFi goes out that far.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIQWyYQ0EYg

FWIW, also an edge approach, with Prometheus etc.

Thanks for sharing that link. You can see from the product that neither the CEO (Adlink), President (Gannett), Dir or Eng (P&G) have any experience with vehicles.

I love that they are doing a hybrid stepside truck chassis with BMW engines but I hope they have something else. A public NASDAQ company that has $90M in paid-in capital but only $10M cash now, had better sell to stay alive. I hope they do. The basic idea is good; they need to execute.

What electrics have a "big problem with heating" and what are the other vehicles are in the class of "this one, with no insulation"?

Also what is your off-road experience, that you can say "you'll cut yourself on the door handles." _citation needed_

Why use Uber in Germany? I can call a Taxi on an app. That was the "big" invention by Uber, and now it's commoditized.

The idea that anyone can be an uber driver doesn't help me the passenger much, as long as I can get a ride.

OK, I get that in the US taxis are notoriously bad and generally older cars (and no Mercedes). But UberX just substitutes beat down American cars for a beat-down Prius, Kia and smaller cars. How great is that win?

I don't think the haughty arrogant attitude of Uber is good for any society.

It's hard for me to interpret this outside the 2017 pressure chamber of headlines/advertising. It's remarkable similar to a top of mind recall of "what last 10 news articles have you seen published recently?"

There are many good and important issues that didn't make the list, and I wonder if prompting or discussion would increase the breadth.

This seems to be the list of issues that many articles have been talking about for the last month. Things we're supposed to care about, because, social proof.

One can either believe news articles are crafted to deliver what we want to hear (appeal to our beliefs) or that we are remarkably adept consumers, champions and descerners of (unbiased!) truth.

9 out of 10 doctors agree!