HN user
Until somebody comes along and uses it for that. Fun toy turns into decision making tool that the creator never intended. Maybe nothing will come of it. That's just my unfiltered opinion on it. I don't assume malicious intent, only identifying the possible vector.
It means prices will go up and service/quality will go down. I already consider the service sort of at a base state. If it gets any worse, it will just go under. Which is what they want.
Questionable ranking algo. Easily hacked. We shouldn't and don't really need to "gamify" GitHub stats as it's likely extremely unhealthy.
Wasn't really trying to take the socialist view. Merely stating what usually happens. Grow the business usually means make more money in the easiest way possible (cost cutting usually) rather than invest in future gains.
Capitalists usually recoup gains rather than re-investing in people or working in new verticals. This gels with companies who would rather do anything else than grow.
And Americans leave because employers will just replace them with offshoring and h1bs to save money. It's a self perpetuating cycle. Loyalty goes both ways. Employees finally realized that they should be treating employers like employers have always treated employees. That's capitalism.
In 2025, social media has moved from self-expression to self-entrapment
I sort of feel if you're only figuring this out now you've been willfully/woefully ignorant.
How are we not full circle back to the early 00's with this design? It didn't really catch on then. Maybe this time? Wasn't a big fan of it then. Still not.
The point is, supplements will mostly only help you shore up deficiencies in your diet and generally won't do it as effectively as eating right. No matter how much supplementation you do, you can't out-run a bad diet.
Honestly, likely not that much. From what I've found you can get recommended dosage and more from just eating the right foods. Right meaning foods rich in what you're looking for. Now in context that may be hard for some people or they just don't like those foods. So supplementing makes sense.
The meaningfull context here was "good diet". If middle distance runners ate for middle distance running would they need to take beta alanine? E.g. ate more organ meat which contains high levels of beta alanine.
I don't want to be rude, but your off-topic anecdote about my uninteresting and useless anecdote is also... uninteresting and useless.
Over the years through my own involvement in sports and physically demaning jobs with trying a lot of different supplementation, I've come to the conclusion that most (if not all) supplements provide little to no value beyond a good diet. If they do, they're either illigal as non-perscription and/or require regular physician monitoring use correctly.
I would say not really. This pretty much only fits the exact use case for its specific niche need. E.g. operating in RF adverse/non-recoverable environments. Otherwise it's a waste. So technically it's still not "popular" in the sense of general popularity. You're not going to see your general drone pilot rushing to put fiber optic on thier drone. This also isn't a new concept. Its the same thing as wire-guided missiles that have been around since WWII.
Because they already have something that works. Why switch if theres no advantage.
Salient point, the US is the only American country with America in it's actual name. Names of things change. It's how language works. Even though I think Gulf of America is actually more apt a name, I and most people in the US could care less what it's called. It's just Trump playing power games like China does with the "South China Sea" v. "Sea of Japan".
I think those two in particular might be poor examples, since they generally do quite a bit of de-branding on their products. I know what you mean however. Supreme is a prime brand for this. Nobody is buying a Supreme t-shirt for any other reason than the logo. Whatever thoughts on people who buy things to impress others may be, those kind of people exist and to each thier own. They at least made the choice to let everyone else know what they value.
It's actually a perfect analogy, IMO. Tattoo, is a form of (typically chosen) self-branding. A lot of companies make great products and then deminish them by thier mis/use of branding. Usually in a tactless way. This is a prime example of that.
Edgar Friendly said it best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjoSQ-lCA58
Nah. Stop taking everything you read on the internet so literally.
They definitly can be. That's the slope. Where do you stop. Any totalitarian worth thier salt can easily make that leap. Use monitoring to curb one type of crime and "undesirable" behavior, why not use it for other types and before you know it, your entire existince is monitored in detail just to make sure you're acting exactly the way "they" want you to. That's how it works. The "I have nothing to hide" is a long debunked argument.
Do they really stop you at gun-point to get you to pull over? Didn't think so. Of course police are armed. You're taking the comment to literally.
Enforcing traffic laws is good, actually. Automated enforcement is even better so that we don't need to use armed police and can enforce consistently.
We don't use armed police to enforce traffic laws. Police mainly monitor traffic as a revenue device. It's already been proven that monitoring traffic and automating fines in fact promotes reckless driving and causes more accidents than it stops.
It's more something Fascists tend to do. Strict Monitoring/Policing of the populace to elicit desired behavior.
It is, but it's also a slippery slope to constantly monitor behavior in order to coerce a desired response.
Technically, it's both. Parents don't teach their kids because they didn't/don't really know. Financial literacy isn't in the curiculum at all pre-college level. Even then it's not a "core" competency in any degree that isn't finance related. Even just ~10-15 years ago I wouldn't say the topic itself had as wide of discussion as it does today.
COVID really pumped up the market. Lots of hiring at insane TCO especially for unproven talent. Correction had to happen. As someone else said, if you have the experience and skills and fall into the comp. range companies are willing to pay you'll be fine. If you're missing any that it's going to be rough. My company is hiring like crazy, but only for very specific dev roles.
Answer is still no and still for the above reason. Compute resources are only relevant to how fast it can answer not the quality.
It's not a loss if they're still net positive from their unrealized gains. It's basically the home ownershipt version of "I know what I've got" but they in fact don't.