avalys

What method do you suggest is more information-dense and less lossy?

What people are lamenting is that reading is being replaced with less information-dense, less accurate, less effective mechanisms, like Tiktok shorts and TV news.

Switzerland has a population of 9M people - the entire country has fewer people than the third or fourth largest US metro area - and a GDP per land area 8x that of the US. What works for Switzerland as a matter of policy, is essentially irrelevant when it comes to governing the US.

I’m referring to Doctorow’s credibility, not Williams.

“Zuck is also revealed to have given the Chinese state access to all of Facebook and the power to censor content they disliked, as part of a failed bid to get permission to offer a Facebook service in China.”

This did not happen and I’m not aware of any evidence or allegations that it did. Williams claims that Meta indicated they would accept China’s demand to give the Chinese government access to Chinese users’ data, as a condition of being allowed to operate in China. This is not the same as access to “all of Facebook”, and it didn’t happen at all because operating permission was never granted.

So, the author is a liar who distorts facts to make for a more interesting article. Don’t waste your time listening to people with no integrity.

What else that this article claims is distorted bullshit, I wonder?

Next time you read an article from “Pluralistic”, ask yourself, are they telling the truth or are they lying to push an agenda?

I have no particular connection to Zuck or Meta. I just find this behavior incredibly obnoxious and hypocritical.

There are many factors driving this:

1. Fuel economy regulations that scale regressively with vehicle size, that incentivize automakers to build and market larger vehicles that are easier to hit regulatory targets.

2. Rollover and crash worthiness regulations that require thicker A-pillars and more robust roof structure.

3. Towing performance. The large pickup manufacturers are in an arms race to beat each other’s power and towing capacity numbers. This requires a large, upright grille to provide adequate cooling for a large engine.

4. Consumer demand. The idea that marketing is telling people what to buy is silly. People are spending $80k+ on massive vehicles because they like them. Simple as that. The industry puts lot of marketing effort behind vehicles that are flops. They can’t make people buy a product they don’t want.

Disclaimer: I own a huge diesel pickup, along with a Tesla Model Y and a Porsche 911. Why? They’re fun! I use the pickup to tow an RV, but it’s also just fun to drive.

I have definitely noticed the visibility problem though. Forget pedestrians, sometimes entire cars are hiding behind the A-pillar! You have to move your head to the side to clear the blind spot safely.

Nice to see a unanimous decision on a (by most appearances) controversial topic like this.

It was a unanimous decision.

The Cybertruck and Jaguar rebrand are both complete flops.

Interesting product advice you have to offer. Who do you think is the target market for expensive Italian sports cars, if not “car enthusiasts”?

This would have a chance as a $250k entry-level Ferrari. Not much of a chance, but a chance. At $600k? Crazy.

You could buy a V12 Ferrari at that price, if a Ferrari is what you want. Or a Rolls Royce Spectre if you want something quiet and luxurious.

These are pretty expensive and specialized electronic warfare planes that are identical to a regular F18 in aerodynamic performance. Sucks to lose two of them for an airshow display. Isn’t that what the Blue Angels are for?

Am I supposed to know what a “system card” is?

How do you feel about the batteries in electric vehicles?

What about wearable devices like a smartwatch, headphones, smart glasses?

Should all these be consumer-replaceable without tools, regardless of the effect on the other things people value in these devices (waterproofing, size and weight, battery life, etc.)?

FYI I do not work for anything close to the consumer tech industry.

Magneto-optical drives are what I miss! The nearest thing we ever had to a durable and useable long-term storage media for normal users, as far as I know.

Don’t know who this guy is, but I’m glad I never interviewed with him. This is language-version-specific behavioral minutiae that anyone can look up in 5 minutes in the rare case it matters, and is otherwise irrelevant to engineering software at a senior level.

This article is a junior engineer’s idea of what a senior engineer should know.

It’s not that they can’t afford it, it’s that Android users aren’t worth the investment.

Like others here, I don’t have this problem. I often leave them in my backpack for weeks between airplane flights, etc.

Up 30% is not “nearly doubles”.

Yeah, if you haven't used a social network for years, and nor do your friends, and you log in to the social network, you get pretty trash content. This shouldn't be surprising.

This looks like the controls for a very stylish Italian delivery van. Not an exotic sports car.

What is an example of such a condition?

Ridiculous nonsense. Boycott Fedex because of a $2.3M delivery contract with ICE? Cancel Spectrum internet because there is an ICE field office in Texas that uses them? Cancel Comcast because they provide cable TV? Unsubscribe from Netflix because...no reason?

No wonder it is organized by a professor of marketing who has been building a personal brand of hating the tech companies for a decade.

Boycott this performative nonsense.

Firing a bunch of ineffective managers because they can easily be replaced by AI seems like a net improvement to me.

You can measure my productivity by how slouched I am.

Sitting up straight at my desk, chair locked, perfect posture? I’m doing nothing, maybe looking through System Preferences to change the system highlight color.

Sliding down in my chair like jelly, with my shoulders where my butt should be and my head resting on the lumbar support? I’m building the next iPhone and it’ll be done by 2 AM.

This article is AI slop.

This is a great example of how patronizing policies developed by intellectual authorities backfire in the real world.

The premise is, the general population is too stupid to do the right thing themselves and need to be reminded of the drought by being inconvenienced by completely ineffective performative policies.

All this actually does in practice is diminish trust in authorities to make good decisions. If the drought policies are bogus, which other ones are too? Fuel economy standards? Air quality? OSHA?

Instead of this nonsense - just allow the market to set the price of water based on what’s available.

Of course, the answer there is usually “Oh but there are special interests that need to be able to consume as much water as they want without paying more for it, even in a drought!” And thus as usual the problem is not the personal conduct of individual citizens but corrupt and spineless politicians who are not actually interested in solving any problems.

No! What a disaster. Enforce the costs of externalities as close to the source as possible. If electricity costs more money charge more money for electricity. Don’t add some “regulation” to force end users to pay more based on your estimate of how much more you think electricity should cost.

Not obvious to me that this is worse or as user-hostile as many seem to presume.

Previously the blue background made the ad result look more highlighted and more prominent.

Now it is just like the other results - not special or better.

Yes, the HN audience knows the visual convention indicates that the blue background represents an ad. Does your everyday user know that or do they assume the blue results are better?

This is much less interesting than the headline suggests. 1.5 times background levels, of a single very long-lived isotope, is not much of an increase.

This doesn’t indicate that there has been a recent undisclosed accident or other newsworthy event as you might be imagining.

I don’t see the supposed hypocrisy of mocking the absurd and incompetent ways in which downsizing is handled, yet acknowledging that it is sometimes a net benefit to carry out.

In one example, AWS has two options for automatic deletion of objects in S3 buckets that are versioned.

"Expire current versions" means that the object will be automatically deleted after some period.

"Permanently delete non-current versions" means that old revisions will be permanently removed after some period.

I asked ChatGPT for advice on configuring a bucket. Within a long list of other instructions, it said "Expire noncurrent versions after X days". In this case, such a setting does not exist, and the very similar "expire current versions" is exactly the wrong behavior. "Permanently delete noncurrent versions" is the option needed.

The prompt I used has other information in it that I don't want to share.