igor47
igor47 on Hacker News
I feel like I would have loved this a year ago when I still reviewed PRs by reading diffs. Alas these days I do my reviews inside a harness using my code review skill:
https://github.com/igor47/dotfiles/blob/master/claude/skills...I don't see how I could keep up with the volume of code my team now produces without this. How do other people do it?
> Unfortunately, Nadella also refers to AI as “super intelligence” throughout the post.
What's the deal with these clowns? Nadella's estimated net worth is like $600M. Is that still not enough for him to buy himself a spine?
What does this have to do with internalizing costs to businesses? By your logic, the government should just subsidize all consumer goods... Which, okay maybe I actually agree with you? (Jk I'm not that much of a socialist. I think markets are great, and we should leverage them by fully pricing externalities like road damage or pollution, enabling the market to solve some of our big problems)
Let those consumers pay for it then!
If the costs of trucking is internalized, it then factors into the cost of goods shipped by truck. This makes it possible for competitors like rail or local produce to complete, which then allows consumers to save money. On the other hand, if the cost is externalized, we secretly pay more without even having the possibility of paying less.
Two questions: 1. Have the "fud-spreaders" actually held anything back so far? Seems like we're barreling forward, even though some of the FUD spreaders appear to be in charge of the main companies. 2. Do you, like Huang, see absolutely no risk in our current approach? Is everyone who disagrees with your perspective on this subject just plain wrong? Misguided, or actively malicious/in bad faith?
I listened to this podcast and it was maddening. A few of his frames :
AI is just software, nothing new to see here.
AI safety is primarily a sandboxing problem.
There is no collective action problem, and every company should just slow down if they think they need to slow down.
There is no need for regulation because the existing incentives in the market keep companies from acting badly, which is why no company has ever done anything bad.
If something bad does happen, then we can regulate after the fact.
We will end up creating more jobs than we destroy, so don't worry about it.
Our kids might forget a whole bunch of stuff or never learn it in the first place. But don't worry, they'll come up with new things to learn instead.
The only way to get safety is to move faster because then we will more quickly arrive at safety.
Recursive self-improvement is just what we've always done.
The real danger is alarmism that might scare the public and the young people.
Nothing bad can happen, it can only good happen.
No dude, it was an analogy. Sorry to pick on you, you're just another ignorant uninformed take in this thread, but come on. This technology is progressing at an insane rate, the shit it's doing now is science fiction from just a year or two ago, and people just keep on moving the goal posts, it's maddening. The technology is unpredictable and that in itself has risks. You must realize that the window of possibility is widening the further into the future we go! Can you pick people with epistemology you trust and see if there's anything you can learn in this moment? Can you try to challenge your own ideas instead of retreating into comfortable certitude? There are real risks here, they are worth taking seriously, and serious people are doing so!
Visions of vast data centers surrounded by fields of browning grass, in which aging, rusting, formerly extremely expensive hardware is spending billions of compute cycles looking at anime catgirls
Warmer water holds less dissolved gases of all kinds, including CO2. You can see this yourself by heating water in your kitchen. Well below the boiling point, you can observe tiny bubbles, which are composed of nitrogen and oxygen dissolved in the water coming out of solution. The oceans will eventually become carbon sources, not carbon sinks, if they warm enough, but that's not projected to happen this century.
However, there are regions of the oceans which currently absorb lots of CO2 which will absorb much less as time goes on. One important example is the AMOC, which, by turning over lots of water, helps sink surface dissolved CO2 into the deeper ocean. In recent years, oceanographers have observed a weakening of the AMOC, which was predicted but is happening much earlier than expected. This is one of the important planetary tipping points, which could cause a dramatic shift in the planet's climate.
But don't worry -- the Trump administration is defunding programs like the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, decommissioning the Ocean Observatories Initiative, and is planning to shutter NOAA's research arm altogether -- thus solving the problem once and for all.
Back when I still used Google, in the dark old days of mid-late 2025, it sure seemed like the SEO was winning. Once you got to page 3, where the ads ran out, you would then smoothly transition into total scam. A common one was where they'd show you scraped SO (remember that one?) content which somehow placed higher in the rankings than actual SO, and there'd be like 3 of those in various skins. I assumed they wanted to show me more ads, though those were much more easily handled with an ad blocker, unlike Google's search results. I assume it's continued to deteriorate from there, does anyone know?
> A number of prominent Westerners have spoken out against the dam over the years - Republican icon Barry Goldwater, former congressman and interior secretary Stewart Udall, his brother and another former congressman, Mo Udall, and David Brower, a patriarch of the environmental movement.
> All supported dam legislation in 1956. All now say it was a mistake. Goldwater calls the dam "the one vote I wish I could take back."
From https://lasvegassun.com/news/1997/may/26/once-proud-symbol-g...
I meant architect as in "political architect"
One problem with hydro is we've long ago exhausted the easy wins, and then went on to build the kinda wash outs. See the fight over Glen canyon, which even its architect went on to admit was a mistake. The wins now are in closed loop pumped hydro; see
https://www.volts.wtf/p/whats-the-deal-with-pumped-hydro
I tried repeatedly with several credit unions, with poor results. The final straw was the patelco hack that made the entire bank unavailable for over a week. In the aftermath they implanted crazy security measures where talking to a rep required 6 layers of increasingly invasive authentication. But... The hack was of the bank infrastructure. It had nothing to do with individualized fraud, all accounts were affected --it was just security theater. I went back to a major bank after that.
I migrated to mise from just. Mise handles more stuff (tool versions, environment vars) and also has nicer ergonomics for specifying tasks
Can someone give me the current consensus on Howard Gartner/multiple intelligence vs. g, or general intelligence? Is this even something that people still discuss and research in academia, or did the whole field get tainted by accusations of racism and counter accusations of censorship? Gary's claim here rests on an implicit disregard of general intelligence, which seems counter intuitive to me, but it's been a long time since I've looked into it
I've been thinking of making a service which automatically sends deletion requests for all my service companies every month. Like, I currently keep a bunch of spyware features in my car turned of, but I have to keep location turned on to use the built in navigation which keeps track of range for me. Would be nice to have a ceiling on that data's retention.
Long term, if compliance with data deletion requests becomes a pain, maybe companies will finally give us an opt out of surveillance capitalism? Or maybe they'll just lock me out of my own car (I guess it's their car since I don't have root on it, lol)
I still write tsx and my components look very similar to react -- just no hooks. The difference is I render to html server side and send the rendered html. Look into it in hono
I do get kind of annoyed that htmx submits forms using form url encoding. It's non trivial to validate, see
https://igor.moomers.org/posts/zod-schemas-htmxAs a result for POST requests you have to have htmx routes that accept urlencode and API routes that accept JSON, and JSON is far superior. But for outputs I actually think separating your UI and API is helpful. The code reuse is not worth the entanglement of concerns.
Why are you so wedded to JSON responses? HTMX is meant to be used to render html; my big HTMX app basically never(1) renders JSON, so much so that I have a standing instruction to coding agents that if they're rendering JSON they're probably doing something wrong. If you're attached to JSON because you're working with external API s you don't control, a good place to perform those kinds of actions is in your backend, which can then return html to your frontend
(1) the exception is I think in one place concerned a flow for uploading images, where client side requests a signed url, uploads to that url, then registers completion. Getting the signed url back is JSON meant for the uploader
Hmm. I'm as big an environmentalist as anyone, but I'm pretty sceptical of the data centers as eco disasters narrative. Your sources indicate that renewables already meet over 50% of new data center demand, and the demand is predicted to drive advancements in technologies like SMRs. The water use of a data center is less than a golf course. Gas and coal cannot compete with renewables on price and speed of deployment, and increased utilization of the existing grid can help cover fixed costs which dominate the cost structure, resulting in decreased prices overall even as we increase deployment of renewables.
Addressed in the source, but there's an asymmetry favoring the attackers. They only have to find one exploit once. The defenders have to be perfect all the time.
I wonder if it was just a start up issue? Some kind of initial scan of your database?
But it's not though. The root of the problem is politics, and the root of that problem is self -interest.
I'm pretty mad about the blatant manipulation of index funds by spacex, and I looked into how to avoid the IPO. If you're like me, the amount of unrealized gains from index funds over the past few years mean the tax penalty of exiting these funds is just too big (the majority of my money is not in tax advantage accounts like a 401k). If not for the tax reasons, I would probably go with a direct index. Vanguard and Fidelity both have em. But honestly even at inflated float ratios this stock makes a very small part of the overall index. What I hate is forcibly being made party to such blatant manipulation, but like any other "concentrated benefits, diffuse costs" situation, it's probably too low a real cost for most people to deal with.
Multiple comments on this thread about how bad it would be if the main character was a woman. Why is that so bad?