HN user

nix0n

1,397 karma
Posts1
Comments574
View on HN

that server is almost certainly going to be a VM and not bare metal

I understand that this is normal but I've never understood it.

If all the containers are running the same company's applications (so they don't care about security boundaries between them), what's the difference between having all the containers under the same kernel vs separate kernels?

Remember how when google bought youtube for 1.65 billions people thought they are crazy? Or when facebook bought instagram.

I think these are good examples: in both of those cases the buyer had a plan to monetize.

If you are a user of Cursor, expect to pay more for it or switch.

This is partly due to having a safety factor: i.e. using twice as much steel as you think you need.

Understanding means knowing the limits of your own understanding, and building in safeguards.

Linux is a global project, and open source more broadly is also of course global.

Linux Mint (the distro I use) was started and is led by French developer Clement Lefebvre.

QEMU and FFmpeg are among the notable projects started by French developer Fabrice Bellard.

VLC was started by students of École Centrale Paris.

These are just the things that I know about as an American, so I'm sure there are more.

people who have never used the product and don't think like or accurately represent our users

I agree completely that these are the important qualifications to be setting direction for a product.

Find your most socially competent engineer, and have them talk to users a couple times a month.

This doesn't necessarily follow from the above, but in Anthropic's case specifically, where the users are software engineers, it probably would have worked better than whatever they have going on now.

In general, it's probably better to have domain experts doing product management, as opposed to someone who is trained in product management.

The average answer writer on SO is not actually that toxic: really it's the voters.

The top answer will almost always be an explanation of why the asker is wrong to want to do the thing they want to do. But that's not most answers, or most answerers, just the top ones.

The bottom answer will almost always be an honest attempt to write code that answers the question. Sometimes the code doesn't work, or needs explanation: these problems will be solved a couple answers up from the bottom.

My technique for years has been to click the SO link in search results, then hit End on my keyboard to jump to the bottom of the page. This a little slower than reading a cached LLM answer, but faster than waiting for the LLMs to generate something.

Systemd v259 7 months ago

Support for System V service scripts is deprecated and will be removed in v260

All the services you forgot you were running for ten whole years, will fail to launch someday soon.

It carries all of the biases us humans have and worse the biases that are present in the information we chose to explicitly share online

This is going to be a huge problem. Most people assume computers are unbiased and rational, and increasing use of AI will lead to more and larger decisions being made by AI.

the person / team who would go on to actually crack brain-like AI would be remembered closer to Hitler than to Einstein

I completely agree. I think that the people who are funding AI research are essentially attempting to create slaves. The engineers actually doing the work have either not thought it through or don't care.

Assuming it comes with consciousness, which I think is fair to presume, brain-like AI seems to me like a technology that shouldn't be made.

"Fair to presume" is a good way to put it. I'm not convinced that being "like a brain" is either necessary or sufficient for consciousness, but it's necessary to presume it will, because consciousness is not understood well enough for the risk to be eliminated.