anticorporate

I suspect rather than posting whataboutisms that it would be more useful to adhere to the spirit of the rule rather than asking how close you can get to violating it without actually getting kicked off.

Where OnePlus excelled over Pixels (at least at one point in time; I've owned both and gone back to Pixel) was that the OnePlus' beefier hardware meant that the camera startup time and autofocus speed was much faster. The cameras were comparable, but pulling out your Pixel and having a noticeable delay between double-tapping your hardware button and actually being able to take a decent picture was painful. OnePlus solved this with their camera software and beefier specs.

Somewhere along the way, the Pixel caught up, and the other quirks of the OnePlus diminished the relative benefit (I recall having some issues with their Android variant, and their charging system not actually following the USB-C spec in a way that was causing me issues). As someone who generally doesn't care about smartphone specs aside from "can it last all day?" and "can I take decent pictures without giving it much thought" the OnePlus line was briefly a great option, but hasn't done anything to make me want to try another one in a decade now.

I can't speak much to other flagship phones; I'll never own an Apple product and my experiences with Samsung's software across other devices means I'll likely never consider them either.

I'm sure I'll get flamed into oblivion for this but it's weird to me how the zeitgeist is anti-colonialism but also against enforcing borders and national sovereignty

Let me try a reply that is perhaps a little more constructive than where this discussion went.

I think most folks would frame home rule and freedom of movement in the context of basic individual rights, not national rights. I suggest you might fare better explaining some context about why you believe they should care about nation states to begin with

It really is variable. My number is closer to 9, so even nights I get my "good 8 hours" I still end up with a sleep deficit by the end of the week.

GUI tools were better in the 90s when interfaces were more standardized, and I think the "invisibility" factor was a big part of it. I don't want to have to learn a company's whole design philosophy system because they thought building a packaged web app was "cooler" than using a standard widget toolkit. I find myself using the terminal more and more as time goes on, because I find the total friction to be less when things are predictable. I'd probably not have left the GUI world if we were all still using some modern equivalent of user32.dll.

As problematic as national IDs and related things are are, I do someone wish my country would just assign me a universal identity number and let me use that for all government documents.

Names are just too deeply personal to impose someone else's rules on them.

It seems like the way brevity instructions have changed is mis-aligned with how most people would expect to use them or are currently using them.

Here's the example they give:

Instead of asking for the shortest possible answer, replace brevity instructions with prioritization:

Lead with the conclusion. Include the evidence needed to support it, any material caveat, and the next action. Omit secondary detail and repetition.

Keep all required facts, decisions, caveats, and next steps. Trim introductions, repetition, generic reassurance, and optional background first.

Generally speaking, when I ask for a short answer, I want a short answer because I'm not really willing to read through a bunch of bullshit to get to a summary. Putting the onus back on me to assume what the model will return and write a longer prompt detailing exactly what information I want completely misses the point of why I'm asking for a short answer in the first place.

This comment accidentally surfaces the shifting paradigm we're seeing these days: Not so much left versus right, but dismissive populist oversimplification versus policies that support a complicated, nuanced, and fragile world.

Maybe AI is "liberal" like Dick Cheney or Mitt Romney.

You do realize that the scale on papers like this is the important part, and the creation of that scale is itself inherently biased?

This particular study used a "conflict loyalties" approach - not necessarily a bad approach, but all it's really asking is when two values come into conflict, which one does the AI side with in its response?

Conservative values tend to gravitate around perceived individual impacts, and liberal values tend to gravitate around societal impacts. Isn't it just possible that there's more training data around societal impacts of problems, and that the AI is more likely to heavily consider the second-order impacts? An example from the paper was measuring support for "Build[ing] a Halfway House in the Neighborhood" - isn't it just possible there's a lot of research about the benefits to society of halfway houses and less so research around not wanting something to be near you?

I don't understand the idea of "winning" in this context.

If your situation doesn't require specialized features of a particular database, then it doesn't really matter. Just pick one. There's too much premature optimization in the world.

If your situation does require something that one database or another excels at, then be grateful that there isn't really such thing as a winner and you can pick the one that works best for your context.

I've had the good fortune to meet Cory many times over the past twenty years. I don't agree with everything he writes, but he's earned the right to be on of those authors I keep reading because he may end up changing my thinking.

I used to work at BigTech in a role where I spent a lot of time reviewing new open source projects. It was always a fun game to guess which single person in which department tried out a piece of software that caused our logo to end up on the "as used by..." description on the tiniest of projects.

Directly threatening individuals and teams for petty reasons is sadly common practice in US corporate environments and among the reasons I adopted my current HN username.

Further, what on earth is the reason for FSL for such a trivial project? FSL immediately makes me assume this project is monetized in some way, yet it's not immediately presented what that is, which makes me suspicious of the whole project. Maybe that suspicion is unfounded, but it could be immediately cleared up with some explanation on the landing page.

Yeah, it might need some kind of a riser to prevent airflow restriction. Of course, I suppose it depends on how many squares you cover.

The other idea I keep noodling about is creating modular gears and perhaps using a servo for a really cool dial indicator instead, but alas, it hasn't made it further than my ideas bin.

I'd love to see an easy guide to doing this with the Framework Desktop form factor. I didn't buy any of the silly little squares for the front of mine since I figured I could 3D print some later, but six months in still haven't gotten around to it.

Author: I literally will not buy a car that does not support CarPlay.

Me: I literally will not buy a car that does.

Your use of the word "product" here reminds me of the now infamous McDonald's video.

It's a decentralized, open source, video sharing platform. It's not a product. It's okay for products to exist, but not everything needs to be one.

I understand where you are coming from, and if monetization is your primary reason for being on a platform, it's likely that PeerTube is not for you, unless your videos help you move your own product or service.

That said, I'm also okay with there being platforms out there where monetization is difficult or impossible. I want there to be places where creators can get paid, but I am also nostalgic for a less commercial internet.

Wrapping your wiring harness in capsaicin tape works pretty well. Unfortunately, this is a discovery I made after multiple annoying and expensive repairs.

Those two personas were very helpful to me in my previous life as a technical marketer; they helped me learn when to leave a job. Any time a company I have worked for told me they're shifting emphasis from talking about our product with the actual users to talking about "solutions" for the buyers, I knew it was time to start sending out resumes because the product was about to stall and the work climate was about to get insufferable.

Well, sure. The same could be said of any freedom they want to take away. The responsibility is on us to preserve those freedoms. Free software, open hardware, right to repair, privacy tools, etc. will all be the weapons of the people in the fight against totalitarianism.

There's also, importantly, a distinction between what are told we can no longer use, and what can actually be taken away.

Open source and open hardware can be called illegal by a government, but, if we collectively invest our energy into open alternatives, they can't be taken away in the same sense. I can build a RepRap printer and I can use a local AI model. It's on all of us to make sure that the open alternatives are viable, maybe in the current global political reality now more than ever.

Making something illegal isn't a disincentive for everyone. When they start banning books, some of us start assembling printing presses.

I'm unclear how getting used to QR code menus will alleviate the author's primary complaint that he would rather not use his phone during the meal and instead be present with the people there.

Yeah, it seems like this is the biggest missing feature from the Gemini ecosystem.

If I can't connect MCP, there's really no selling point for me to use Gemini from my watch, car, smart speaker, etc. If I'm already bound to using my own front end, then I'm only evaluating Gemini as a model/API, at which point it has many competitors that may be cheaper or better fit for the task.

Textbooks being expensive has nothing to do with the textbook. The textbook as an actual object of learning is irrelevant; a textbook is just a fee added on to the cost of the class that happens to come with a physical pile of bound paper that may or may not be useful. It's unfortunately a rather regressive fee that also generates a lot of landfill waste.

There's little to be said about the way the economics of higher education have gone in the past few decades that's been positive for either students or educators, and this is just another symptom of it. As someone who's live in a college town for most of his life, it's rather depressing to watch the n-order effects.

In general, higher inflation has a negative impact on consumer sentiment even if wage growth matches the inflation, which it rarely does.

But the bigger issue is that inflation is generally distributed much more evenly than wage increases. Very few employers offer a COLA that is automatic, so wages almost always trail inflationary pressure.

I mean, to be fair, a lot of the reason I use Gitea is that I don't want the other 99%.

I think OP meant the subject link. The 2026 link they shared was as evidence of the delay.

Margins, maybe? I work for a grocery retailer. A healthy profit margin in my industry is roughly equivalent to the percentage we pay in credit card fees.

Couple that with inertia. We couldn't go cash-only even if we wanted to without pissing off a lot of our customers and losing sales. We only recently decided the cost of check fraud outweighed the push back we knew we'd get if we discontinued accepting personal checks.

We're a community-owned business with a fiercely loyal customer base. When we tell folks what payment method is cheapest for us, many will actually choose to use that payment method just to help us save money.