HN user

elsjaako

894 karma
Posts1
Comments289
View on HN

Exactly. And I'm no purist - I'm happy to use "dot" with a mouse if I want to easily repeat an edit in tens of places if they're not nicely aligned or searchable.

From the article:

multiple cursors really are better than macros 99.999% of the time (since they give direct visual feedback)

I don't know what he means, vim macros also give direct visual feedback while writing them. You just edit as normal while recording, and replay those edits later. I think it is technically possible to write a macro without seeing the live effect on the text as you write it, but I've never done that.

I looked up multiple cursors out of interest, I guess the advantage is that it's one interface that is easy to explain. I would use multiple vim commands to replace it in practice.

I'll agree that multiple cursors are maybe better than macros for most of the things that someone would use multiple cursors for, but usually I wouldn't use macro's.

But I think most of the things I do with macro's cannot be done with multiple cursors.

I would be very interested in being proven wrong, if someone has some examples of "this is where multiple cursors are great, and vim doesn't have a good alternative".

I don't know about this case, so I can only speak in general.

A lot of times people that say this don't make a strong case that some theoretical more moderate protest would be effective. There is just a feeling that if they personally feel offended by the actions of the protester then it's probably a bad thing.

In reality it's often more complicated. I know some people that are involved with controversial protests, and the effectiveness of their actions is definitely something they think about. It can't be too extreme, that will put people off like you say. But often there is conversations like in this thread, "this protester goes too far, but they do have a point". This moves the Overton window in the desired direction.

The goal isn't too make you like the protester, it's to make you think about the issues.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but zero-mistake seems harsh. I would say that AI references are a sign of something that is not simply a mistake.

However, we can have zero tolerance for certain techniques for "writing" a paper. Plagiarism and inventing data are already examples of this, if there is evidence for these techniques being used there is no excuse. We could say the same for AI references - any writing process that could produce these is by definition not a technique we want.

So the mistake isn't not checking a reference the AI gave. The mistake is letting the AI make references for you.

If we agree that academic research is important then I think we can impose certain standards on how you do it. We can dissalow certain tools if that means we can't trust the output. Just like an electrician can't use certain techniques, even if they're easy, because we don't trust the final result.

To be technically correct: if even a single non-premium member can, for some reason, see who viewed their profile, then the statement "only Premium members can see who has viewed their profile" is false.

So technically, you can't say that the first part of the statement is false from the screenshot.

Maybe I'm lucky in the instance I chose or the content I like being uncontroversial, but this isn't my experience at all.

I've heard of instances carrying a lot of Nazi content being banned, and of instances choosing not to re-host adult media (which makes the interface a bit worse, but doesn't actually block you from getting that). But most admins from what I've seen are pretty clear on this in the about page of the instance.

70% seems like a wild claim.

I have had content I like being removed from major social media platforms, like reddit and tumblr.

Also, if you choose an instance and it gets shut down, you just start another account. This isn't serious business, it's social media. To me, complaining about having to choose an instance to start is like complaining about having to choose a class at the start of an RPG.

Personally, I really love mastodon as a platform and I don't understand all the hate it gets here.

If you have a big site and want as broad an access as possible I agree.

But I wouldn't be surpised if we start seeing self-hosted minecraft or factorio servers with ipv6 only.

Am I a Tech Bro? 4 months ago

Most societal problems – education, healthcare, climate – have a technological solution.

This is a tricky question. I don't think most societal problems have a technological solution, but those are all examples of societal problems where technology could play a big part in the solution. If technology plays a big part of a solution, is it a technological solution?

FreeCAD v1.1 4 months ago

I'm not experienced with other CAD programs, but I think scaling stuff works fine.

If you want to scale your entire object, there's a scale part operation in the part toolbench.

But in general you wouldn't want to do this. For most real world part, the dimensions you set are based on real world requirements. E.g. These holes need to be M3 and spaced 30mm apart because that's what the part we are connecting to has, but the space to the next set of holes should scale linearly with the length growing, etc.

If you have requirements like that, you should build them into your constraints. If you do this from the start, it's usually pretty easy to make size adjustments to your model.

FreeCAD v1.1 4 months ago

You can name them if you want, and the names will show up in the properties of the operation, and you can reuse the values in formulas.

There's a lot of options, and I think a lot of it is a matter of taste/experience what to use

Technically you can get second-hand keys, but good luck verifying that it's actually a legal resale. Also good luck getting the latest, most up to date version of Vista.

You still aren't allowed to start a group to collectively patch bugs in the old version.

Yes, and the developers of Gnome are strongly encouraging you to move to Wayland. You are free to ignore that suggestion.

If you delete the first 13 words from my previous comment it may be a more suitable comment for you.

You can use an old version of Gnome and accept older software, or you can organize some fellow GNOME enthusiasts to maintain it, possibly with paid developers.

You can't legally get old versions of Windows or Photoshop, and you can't legally fix them if you find problems. GNOME gives you that freedom.

This isn't just a theoretical possibility: both MATE and Cinnamon are GNOME forks.

You can argue that maintaining and developing a desktop environment is an huge project and you can't expect someone to take that on - I completely agree, which is why I think we should be thankful of the developers instead of complaining about being "forced" to use new versions of their software.

Having technical discussions about the merits is fine, but in the end in the free/open source software model the people that make the technical decisions are the ones that make the technology possible. And if so many of those people are moving to Wayland, maybe there is a reason for that.

If enough people agree with you, should pay to get your news in a non-misleading, non-sensationalist way.

Sensationalist and misleading news is caused by newspapers that need to appeal to advertising and rich backers. Paying for news is the solution to these issues.

In my experience, paid news sources are better than free ones already in these aspects. Not perfect, but a lot better.

I pay for a (local, non-english) newspaper. The reporting certainly isn't perfect, but:

- They seem less sensationalist, I guess because they don't depend on clicks to survive - They tell a more complete, less dumbed down story than free sources - They are more boring than free sources

If you want to be informed, the "pay for journalists" model is much better than "hope that advertisers or billionaires pay for you" model.

You can argue that being informed is pointless, but I would argue that independent people working to get informed and then questioning issues is a vital point in a democracy. One model for this is journalists, even if you're not actually reading it.

I don't know about how secure enclaves work, so this may be a solution I'm not aware of. Thank you for explaining!

So I guess the whole game software, or at least a significant part, is loaded encrypted and runs encrypted. It's on the users hardware but the user can't access it.

The only thing I can think of: You say the game payload is encrypted using the public key of a secure enclave. This means the open source game launcher has to pass the public key to the server doing the encryption. Could you not supply a fake public key that goes to a virtual secure enclave? I guess the public key could be signed by intel or something, is that something that happens on current TPMs?

Would it even be possible to do this if the program had to run under Proton/Wine? The original subject here is the launcher running on Linux.

I do wander about the use of an open source launcher at this point though. As someone who prefers open source software, the idea of encrypted software running on my PC makes me uncomfortable, more than just closed source software.

If we have DRM with some private key, then I guess your idea is I download the game files and some private key and that allows me to run the game.

If I can send you the private key and the game and it allows you to run the game with no further inputs, then the DRM is trivially broken (even without open source).

If it does some online check, then if the source is open we can easily make a version that bypasses the online check.

If there is some check on the local PC (e.g. the key only works if some hardware ID is set correctly), we can easily find out what it checks, capture that information, package it, and make a new version of the launcher that uses this packaged data instead of the real machine data.

If you use a private key to go online and retrieve more data, having it be open source makes it trivial to capture that data, package it, and write a new version of the launcher that uses that packaged data.

Basically, DRM requires that there is something that is not easy to copy, and it being open source makes it a lot easier to copy.

It is a more complex system than having a single central organization. Not every interest is well represented, so there may not be a lot of content for everyone.

I've never had a mastodon.social account, but I can understand the frustration of having technical issues. If you really wanted to join, like you said, you can just try joining on a different server or even software - with other social networks you generally don't get that choice.

But it looks like you gave it a try and made the rational choice that, for you, it's not worth that effort.

But just because it's not your thing, and it's not the biggest one out there, doesn't mean it failed or missed it's shot. Personally I think it's pretty amazing that an open source project, with no VC money or marketing department or big corporate tie in, has about a million active users, and has for a long time now.

I see your point a bit better. I definitely agree that insurance can be terrible. I will say that with US health insurance you've pretty much picked the worst possible insurance to compare it to.

Farmers typically have more knowledge and more budget for good advisors than consumer health insurance buyers. There are all kinds of business insurance, and I think these are not usually considered as horrible as health insurance. Also, with good insurance you've got a partner who is very invested in understanding the risks you're taking and letting you know (in the form of how much you have to pay).

Some subsidies are probably a good idea, especially where you want to encourage behaviors that would not naturally be encouraged by the market (e.g. getting farmers to not grow crops that you don't want them to grow, or do things that are good for the environment but not legally required).

Sometimes it's probably neutral, where the food is cheaper in the supermarket but taxes are higher and in the end it's just the consumer paying anyway. My guess is that this usually isn't the most efficient way to get money from consumers to farmers.

And sometimes subsidies are actively harmful, like when they encourage growing crops beyond what the market requires.

I know I shouldn't react this way, but this view that Mastodon can only be successful if it's the largest platform out there always gets under my skin. There are about a million active users of the fediverse, and I know plenty of us find it nice right now.

Active users are measured in different ways by different platforms, so if we compare registered users, fedi has 12.5M compared to 42M for Bluesky. So it's approximately 25% of the size.

It's not the best place to go if you want to get a large following, and it's not Serious Business, but as a user that's not what I want from a social platform. I have plenty of people to follow who are talking about things that interest me.

You're welcome to come have a look if you want, but otherwise no worries. We're doing fine. Maybe you'll check it out sometime when some drama happens at Bluesky. The fediverse is not going away any time soon.

You've repeated the part that the parent poster claimed to understand ("I've heard that it's because farming as a business is full of unpredictability"), but skipped over the part they didn't understand ("wouldn't there be a significant market for private insurance?") with the statement that insurance is a parasite.

Can you explain more why insurance is a parasite? Maybe a state-run insurance would be better?

Subsidies (AFAIK, please correct me if I'm wrong) typically either get paid when farming supplies (tractors, seeds, fertilizer, land etc.) are bought or when the final product is sold. So they are paid when things go well for the farmer, but not (or less so) when the farmer has a bad year.

I feel like the risk of bad years would be better managed by paying farmers when bad years happen. You know, like insurance.

In my experience most people have at least one other chat app installed. Signal, Telegram, Facebook (I think there's a built in messenger), discord, and snapchat are all common. It's just that practically everyone has Whatsapp, so that's the common denominator.

That person died in a car accident and they were wearing a seatbelt! But in any story not about this car accident people generally cast them as the useless.

This story isn't evidence that IRBs are always useless, but also it's not an example of them being useful. The thing this story shows is they are sometimes useless.

Poison Fountain 6 months ago

I don't know what this particular author has against LLMs, but a lot of people are bothered by the very intense, robots.txt ignorming, scraping of their sites.

The website being blocked by the scrapers would be a positive outcome.