hnnameblah365's comments

I think they are only moderating against bots that solely retweet everything posted to the site. A real user can post the statements and pundit in whatever direction they want.

Mighty will eat thru your $1k budget in 2 years with subscription fees alone. And you haven't even bought a budget laptop to run Mighty on yet. Mighty does not save you money.

Also not sure where you got the 20 hour stat. Mighty's marketing claims a 2 hour boost. And I'd take it with a grain of salt since active use of Mighty is like running a video streaming service in the background.

The website also infers that Mighty runs an ad-blocker, which itself is a huge boost to browser performance.

For $0/month Mighty users could become uBlock Origin users, or Brave users, and speed up Chrome by some similar multiple.

The "product" for sale is renting RAM and configuring an ad blocker. I wonder if their ad block plugin or ad list maintainers get any of Mighty"s fat monthly fee or if they're just selling someone else's hard work.

If this is really the future, and users are willing to pay $300+/yr for 16gb of RAM, device manufacturers could eat Mighty's lunch by selling laptops with dedicated browser RAM.

This only makes Chrome faster until you saturate your remote instance's memory with open tabs. The faster isn't really there. A 16gb machine on your desk would run Chrome just as fast. Technically faster cuz no input lag.

This is like selling a monthly subscription to 16gb of RAM, which you can use only for the web browser.

Google could easily lower pagerank for blogspam by measuring density of affiliate links.

They don't, because low quality consumerist search results make the ads fit right in. Also those sites are more likely to contain Google Ads themselves.

The search engine is fully optimized for consumerism, not finding the most relevant result.

I think the source of the maturation adds another interesting twist to the story.

A lot of 2D games today are built with 3D engines, and use modern GPU-assisted tech like shaders for lighting and effects. The path to better 2D needed to pass through a 3D phase just for the tooling.

Tooling is where I think the games industry stores most of its culture. The studios burn through a generation of devs within a decade, so it's risky to leave it in their heads.

I think there's a conflation of processes and tools which leads to the false comparison. Print debugging is a process, which uses a tool called print statements. Stepping through code is a process, which uses a tool called the debugger.

Print debugging excels at triaging the problem. And every language has print statements. Ubiquitous first tier support. They help you narrow down where your assumptions about the program behavior may be wrong.

Once you know what area to focus on, you pull out the debugger and step thru the code.

The other way I thought of that the building itself appreciates is if the craftsmanship style becomes antique or vintage down the line. Or the architect becomes notable, etc.

I would pin the failure on how we view home ownership as an investment vehicle. There's little inherently appreciable to a building. In fact they depreciate over time and require constant investment to maintain.

The location however can appreciate, which we all agree on. But we never say out loud the underlying mechanism. Locations appreciate in value specifically because more humans want to own it.

Viewing homes as investments therefore, requires you to steadily make more and more people want your home who are unable to have it. This explains why NIMBYism is so effective at raising house value.

If Windows devices started charging Apple prices for hardware, would they now be giving the OS away for free too?

Does this argument imply that there is a race to the bottom for all metrics a corporation might care about?

For example, wages moving to countries with less worker protections. Couldn't the same argument advocate for lowering worker protections in the US, so that the jobs don't move to China? Which many of the jobs have done anyway, despite low corporate taxes?

I didn't know, thank you for sharing!

> If you think the world is overpopulated and has serious environmental problems, you might welcome this news.

It me

I agree that most people are unquestioning anthropocentrists and that itself is fine. I disagree that it's the responsibility of everything else on the planet to meet us at the table. It should be humanity's job to close the communication gap. Consider it an act of benevolence if you must.

I don't view it as a deficiency in other species' ability to communicate. It's a deficiency in our ability to listen. The reefs are speaking up, they're literally laying their lives on the line and the 'body' count is communication to humans that we should stop. It's not just coral, we are in the middle of a mass extinction event. One that just so happens to correlate with the exponential growth of humanity.

I think it's fair for people to question direct participation in exponential population growth. More people for more people's sake is not a solution, it's a problem. Of course this leads to a lot of really bad ideas about population control. Its a hard problem to solve, but I argue it's the same class of hardness as getting people to change their behavior in the middle of a mass extinction that doesn't impact them with anything but second order effects.

Until humans find something capable of the level of creation that humans deem higher order, then human logic is the only viable measurement?

This is a circular argument for anthropocentrism. It makes no attempt to define any of its qualifying characteristics from outside the human perspective.

To some, coral reefs, rainforests, and biodiversity are all a level of creation higher order than what humans can produce. Those things didn't need us to exist. In fact we ruin them. Not to mention other forms of created beauty humans haven't figured out how to ruin yet, such as sunsets or starry skies.

I was surprised that Github Actions allows you to write scripts that anon users could trigger by opening PRs. But then it turns out this is how a lot of open source CI flows work. So maybe Github overlooked that they would become the biggest player overnight and be an obvious target?

It's really strange to me. You would think anyone offering free anything on the internet knows there are people out there who will automate abusing your compute, storage, IPs, any resources you leave exposed.

I've seen someone abuse a password reset form cuz they could advertise using that email addr '+' trick. ([email protected]). On a platform that didn't even have a million users. If it's free resources, there's no scam too unlikely.

As a compromise they could display only the magnitude of likes and dislikes. There's no difference to me if something has 100 or 900 dislikes; 1.2M or 7.9M likes.

Maybe animated gif horizontal rule is more accurate. One that comes to mind is a lightsaber, laying on its side. Placed between paragraphs (hopefully) about Star Wars.

Alternatively, page visitor counters would have been another example of outdated web aesthetics.

It's been interesting to watch the rise and fall of internet comment sections. They used to be found at the bottom of just about every page. But the moderation burden has led to their removal in more and more use cases.

News sites started stripping comments from articles so long ago. When you see a comment section on the bottom of an article or blog, it contributes to that feeling that the website hasn't had a remodel in a long time. Like an animated gif spacer from the 90's web.

Now we are seeing the social media hubs, technically places that are entirely comment threads, abdicating moderation responsibility to thread creators. Twitter users can hide replies to their tweets. Youtube creators can as well. Now this.

Overall a good trend, IMO. Moderation responsibility was so diffused that no one did it well.

The emerging pattern is that the site owner can provide global moderation of clear cut illegal activity. This doesn't meet anyone's bar for civil discourse, and there's not a good global solution for how to achieve that, so the site owners will place the next level of moderation in users' hands. This starts to model how it works in the physical world, so I think we're on the right track.

Most of the things you mention are associated with the hype cycle peak and have not found their big use-case yet.

VR has only a few niche applications in entertainment. Crypto is a solution in search of a problem, and a gambling platform in the meantime.

AI isn't driving our cars, handling our customer service, or analyzing our business data. Good old fashioned algorithms written by humans are now being branded by marketing as "AI" which demonstrates we don't know what AI really is and we can't fend off its redefinition.

Robots is a tricky one because it's such a broad topic. Is an arm on an assembly line a robot? What about complex farming machinery? Does it have to look anthropomorphic?

From my bearish perspective on the first three industries, Europe and the EU (these are not interchangeable terms) have a pretty good track record this last decade compared to SV