zeeed

To be fair, the other 50% of the story is that we collectively listen.

It’s been a long while since I found a Chinese CEO’s post on HN.

https://archive.is/btEx6

If you’re on Gmail, there’s “plus addressing” - this allows you to append any term after your email - and then sort accordingly.

So if your Gmail is foo.bar@gmail.com you can use foo.bar+servicename@gmail.com and the mail will still end up in your mailbox. Then you can create a rule that sorts incoming mails accordingly.

Doesn’t the question then become “is there still an objective advantage to good code”

If the answer is yes then it’s a tragedy - but one that presumably will pass once we collectively discover it. If not, then it’s just nostalgic.

This. There’s no limitation to your prompting. If you feed rules and patterns for clean code to a bunch of agents they’ll happily work on that level.

Just right now no one cares enough yet. Give it a year or two.

I could conceive something evolving on a different abstraction layer - say, clean requirements and tests, written to standard, enhanced with “common sense”

Was that an LG?

Is it possible and cost-covering to create an ad-sponsored service that discloses what ad networks collect about users - i.e. age, location, preferences, interests, pregnancy, illnesses etc?

Because let’s be honest - all of us know that a lot of data points are being collected about us, countless articles have been written about the insanity of cookie and user-data monetization networks - still it appears to be a privilege to few to tap into that data trove.

I personally haven’t seen an effort to try and make this transparent. Efforts like this page are commendable and informative, much like amiunique or other services - still they lack the tangible information that sharing this information with “the world” reveals about an affected individual.

Why hasn’t this been done yet? Why is this seemingly not trivial?

Even more than that, we need the people that hold people to the rule. While it’s nice to have a law, you need someone who cares enough to enforce it.

Care to elaborate what perspective the author has been missing and why these lessons or words are ignorant?

Why isn’t this higher up on HN? If true that feels like an unprecedented influence over socials

Finally! I’m a kid of the 80s and I’ve been waiting for this for so long! Thank you!

Serious question: so to all posters above me in this thread, do you do HN regularly as a social but just avoid other sites?

Good detective work. Second mention, some months later: https://www.reddit.com/r/occult/comments/7gi7pd/comment/dqju...

it bugs me to an unreasonable extent that he finished one person short of 7777.

The system and the fact that he executed it though is genius.

Spot on, well put.

Once I could personally meet or just see people (in person or otherwise) that attempted this kind of rewiring of your synapses I realized how deeply unwell they really are.

And for the untrained eye, your point takes it away: Have a hard look at folks who tried (like Crowley, probably the most documented case) and be wary of following advice on the web that puts your mental health at risk, even on HN.

I just read the whole 44 pages and some years ago I spent a day or two delving into Crowley’s work. (I was curious but never had the time or need to practice any of the teachings)

There’s a spooky coherence in the descriptions and that’s what makes it such a fascinating read. The spin that this work puts on the subject - calling this “technology” and likening it to programming adds to this.

To anyone honestly wanting to take this for a spin, I recommend reading the biography of Aleister Crowley first. It’s an interesting read in itself and it also illustrates the risks/dangers. Pictures speak a thousand words.

We all have different guts and understanding your personality, which part of your guts you can trust and with which one’s to maintain a more sober relationship with is a very individual learning journey in my experience.

Only trusting your gut is probably as bad a piece of advice as saying ”never trust your gut”.

If only they hadn’t recently defunded battery tech research they could’ve developed it themselves

There’s a conflict of interest. It is reasonable to assume that any DNs budgeting will pivot around being able to have a “free” place to work at.

The coworking spaces pitched in the article charge north of $500 a month for a simple chair to sit on. some get more expensive if you only want to stay for a few weeks.

That makes it easy to go for the free option and just squat a spot at a cafe.

I feel bad for the good guys who behave respectfully and know when they’ve overstayed their welcome. But for those that don’t Cafe owners need to disincentivize the behavior.

I’m online >12h/day and I work on all devices available while awake. Still, I personally would prefer a cafe that has a strict “no notebooks” & “phone calls and meetings outside” policy.

when pronounced backwards it sounds a whole lot like „revenue“

the old TOS limit the usage to a well-defined purpose (promotion) do not claim the rights to modify and do not make you waive your moral rights to your work

A better version I recently came across is “is there anything you need from anybody?”

This includes the classic “blocker” but besides that opens up for interesting conversations, encourages cooperation and isn’t overly management focused.

For the manager it helps uncover potentially hidden dependencies or team animosities.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2311.16024.pdf

Yes, their POC uses SDR

Incorporates one of the more astounding insights I’ve had over the years: complexity can often be reduced through trust.

No, OpenAI does not expect this, the CEO can be heard here

https://youtu.be/to78maCxFEs

One that sends me a mail when it’s the birthday/anniversary of someone I care about. Helped me to keep many friendships alive over the years.

Probably the only digital thing besides my self-hosted mail account that survived the last 20 years unchanged.

The Swedish lack of word-wrap.

There’s an interesting gap between the interest of the dev and the user here.

The user wants a human to understand their sometimes multi-layered requests. The dev wants these requests to be de-layered and broken into separate issues for tracking and documentation.

There really isn’t a good system today (that I know of) that would facilitate this process with both the user and the dev in mind.

From a perspective of information structuring and prioritization, tickets are perfect (for the dev), yet they lack a “natural” (e.g. email, phone or chat) support exchange where an issue is several issues rolled into one. Or once an issue is resolved there’s the “oh btw while I have your attention” moment where an unrelated issue is discussed but the interaction between the same people is ongoing.

To handle this properly in an email-to-ticket-system the dev would need to ask the user to resend the request in a different mail or themselves open a new issue, which is exactly the overhead the system tries to avoid in the first place. Or either party would need to remember the issue ids to keep a running list, all of which seems undesirable.

In the case of a small team/single dev product it’s that human interaction that’s not paid for so the burden is put on the user, at the cost of a reduced interactive experience.

Is there any better way of solving this? Or are systems being built to support this a bit better than how the Jiras/Redmines of this world are (not) handling it today?

If you allow the question, what long-term goals and general growth (goals) did you set yourself to come to this choice?

That would be several orders of magnitude slower in fact. Plus it would only be one-way communication (sending information, not receiving).