jackcarter
jackcarter on Hacker News
Posted by
jackcarter on Monday October 26, 2026 @11:29AM
from the mattstromawn.com dept.
Is there any professional software that wouldn't benefit from high information density? Most software design is optimized for the non-users who have to approve it.
I haven’t encountered this bug, but I have been frustrated that there’s no way to give a babysitter temporary access to the cameras in the kids’ rooms.
I ended up hosting a local site that embeds the RTSP feeds, which works pretty well, but I was surprised that there’s no native way to do it
It’s funny that this is probably due to bias in the training texts, right? Humans are way more likely to publish their “Eureka!” moments than their screwups… if they did, maybe models would’ve exhibit this behavior.
Now that AI labs have all these “Nevermind” texts to train on, maybe it’s getting easier to correct? (Would require some postprocessing to classify the AI outputs as successful or not before training)
"At some point I realized that rather than do something else until it finishes, I would constantly check on it to see if it was asking for yet another permission, which felt like it was missing the point of having an agent do stuff"
Why don't Claude Code & other AI agents offer an option to make a sound or trigger a system notification whenever they prompt for approval? I've looked into setting this up, and it seems like I'd have to wire up a script that scrapes terminal output for an approval request. Codex has had a feature request open for a while: https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/3052
> wants it moved over to the others side of the utility closet so that when you open the door it is easier to put clothes from there into the dryer
That's when you swap the hinges so the door opens the other way, and you thank the manufacturer for providing such an easy solution to a common problem. It's good to keep things flexible and user-configurable.
Now quick, someone reply with a counterexample of how user configuration complicates the product and increases cost. It's design tradeoffs all the way down...
This is very cool, congrats on the execution!
Seems great for grandparents. Have you tested with older people with frail or arthritic hands? I'm curious how much dexterity and force is required.
"How Good is ChatGPT [3.5] at Coding, Really?"
Camera limitation – it doesn't capture a full sphere. That's exactly the spot where I also noticed it.
This isn't true for RSUs in the USA. You're taxed on the value at the time when you receive them.
Hopefully, a self-driving car would have waited for a safe opening to make the turn.
A heat pump warms a home more efficiently than using the same amount of electricity for resistive heating. It can do this because it's not generating the heat from scratch; it's moving heat from outside to inside.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_pump#Performance
“A hotel that did a business of $10,000 per week in room sales found that its receipts from room sales were less in May than those in April. It looked as if the business was dropping off. May was one day longer than April and yet its room sales were less. The figures, however, proved to be very misleading. As a matter of fact business was actually better in May than in April – ten dollars a day better – but the monthly comparison seemed to show that it was worse.”
So revenue/day was up in May, and there are more days in May, but total revenue was down in May? What's the explanation?
Does anyone know if there's a secret advanced option to search by keyword?
Some Airbnbs have free bicycles available, but there's no "bicycle" filter (possibly for liability reasons). There's also no way to search for homes that mention "bicycle". Instead, I have to comb through every listing.
I think this used to be an option, but they took it away. This is the only feature I've ever wanted from Airbnb search.
Posted by
jackcarter on Sunday February 20, 2022 @04:54PM
from the nytimes.com dept.
Posted by
jackcarter on Friday August 28, 2020 @04:25PM
from the nytimes.com dept.
This is about the notification that a book is ready for pickup.
I learned about Figma recently, in this HN-frontpage article about fast software:
https://craigmod.com/essays/fast_software/It really is delightfully fast. It's no surprise that the team behind it is producing this caliber of content.
Posted by
jackcarter on Sunday July 28, 2019 @01:38PM
from the deathindiorama.com dept.
Posted by
jackcarter on Monday July 01, 2019 @02:31PM
from the retrocomputing.stackexchange.com dept.
I built one myself with some spare parts. I love it, to the point that I wear my helmet for short trips when I otherwise wouldn't bother.
It's modeled after this one: https://www.efficientvelo.com/home/safezone
The key component is the flexible, stays-where-you-put-it arm. Safezone is repurposing an industrial product called "coolant hose" - a 1-ft length costs less than $5. Epoxy a small mirror to the end, and attach it to your helmet with zip ties or velcro straps.
Here's mine: https://imgur.com/a/a9H7bXq
From a comment on the article:
"The normal way to excavate bedrock is dynamite. This would probably not be feasible on this site. But at this rate, from the photo, they are going to be jackhammering for another three years to reach thirty seven and a half feet. I’ve read that in London the Uber rich do these basement pool - theatre complexes all the time under their town houses, but probably digging out dirt. The neighbors should get their council persons involved to pressure DOB to put a blanket prohibition on what is clearly an untenable method of excavation. A Bedrock Amendment: if the site isn’t big or isolated enough for blasting, bedrock is the limit."[0]
In London, lavish basements have become trendy[1], but they don't have to deal with bedrock so close to the surface. The Guardian article only mentions the noise once.
[0]https://nyti.ms/2D2qPOp#permid=31403929
[1]https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/may/07/pool-basement-...
> Why state it that there's a 1/2 chance you win $1? It doesn't seem to help answer the problem because assuming you're playing you will always always win $1. The reason they say this (I think) is that there's really a 50% chance you win $1 and a 50% chance you win $2.
There is a 50% chance of winning exactly $1. There's a 25% chance of winning exactly $2. It sounds like you might be interpreting it to mean "at least $1" instead of "exactly $1".