Preferences

briandear
Joined 2,815 karma
I live in Barcelona. I am a former Apple software engineer.

  1. Very true. Just the other day, another “copyright is bad” post on the front page. Today its copyright is good because otherwise people might get some use of material in LLMs.

    Considering this is hacker news, it seems to be such an odd dichotomy. Sometimes it feels like anti-hacker news. The halcyon days of 2010 after long gone. Now we need to apparently be angry at all tech.

    LLMs are amazing and I wish they could train on anything and everything. LLMs are the smartphone to the fax machines of Google search.

  2. So how do authors make money? Going on concert tours? The copyright system needs reform (Mickey Mouse for example) — but the system protects creators.

    If there were no copyrights, no author would make any money.

  3. It’s not just corporations. Look how much tracking nonsense goes into a recipe blog.
  4. Is it factual?
  5. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    Did congress pass a law I missed? Government communication isn’t a 1st Amendment issue. When you work for any employer, you are subject to the whims of that employer.

  6. No. It’s the idea that you’re renting your paid off home from the government. And the government gets to decide what it’s worth.
  7. > Just imagine giving sensitive personal, government-issued ID to a corporation to install an app outside Google Play

    In Spain, I have to give my NIE (National ID number) and show my government ID just to send or receive a package from FedEx. Why should I have to give up sensitive information just to receive a package?

  8. Hamas to this day still has hostages. People were still butchered and raped by Hamas. The meme that Palestinians are blameless is just not accurate. Not defending either side, just saying this is like the Soviets and the Nazis on the Eastern Front.
  9. > this is not the fault of scientists. This is a byproduct of a severely broken system with the wrong incentives, which encourages publication of papers and not discovery of truth

    Are scientists not writing those papers? There may be bad incentives, but scientists are responding to those incentives.

  10. “Visa Waiver” it’s right there in your comment. Waiver means “no visa required: the requirement is waived.”
  11. Who paid for that 18 months? Your wife’s lower salary did.
  12. That’s true with any country.
  13. Meanwhile, in Australia, they’re raising student visa fees to $1279 (USD.)

    US student visas, after all fees are roughly $500 (USD.)

    UK skilled worker visas are about $1660. The H1B is about $1700.

    The U.K. multi entry visitor visa for 10 year validity is about $1200.

    The U.S. version: $185

    I understand it’s popular to post articles that sensationalize how “bad” the U.S. is, but reasonable people probably should have some perspective.

    https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/australias-ruling...

  14. The EU is far ahead of Texas on this. Spain is launching a “porn passport” system (Cartera Digital Beta) using government-issued digital ID to verify age, and France has already attempted something similar. Under the EU’s Digital Services Act, platforms—including porn sites—must implement age checks for EU users regardless of where the site is based. And this isn’t being led by “conservative Christians”—Spain’s Socialist PM Pedro Sánchez is pushing it. I know we’re talking “America” here, but this isn’t some puritanical American concept.

    This article overreads the Supreme Court’s decision. It upheld a narrow Texas law requiring age verification to access adult content, applying intermediate scrutiny and emphasizing in-state regulatory authority. It didn’t grant states power to prosecute across borders, nor did it change existing limits on state jurisdiction.

    The argument relies on a stack of fallacies:

    Post hoc — assumes the ruling causes harms that depend on future, hypothetical laws.

    Slippery slope — claims this leads to extraterritorial prosecution, which the ruling doesn’t support.

    Appeal to fear — frames state level regulation as existential threat without legal basis.

  15. Landing gear controls are nothing like the fuel shutoffs. And they are in completely different locations. Landing gear controls are in front of the throttle, fuel shutoffs are aft of the throttles.
  16. We could also suggest that aliens in the cockpit did it — about the same probability. Two switches, on independent circuits, both failing within one second of each other in the exact same way?
  17. Nope. First of all, the FO was the “pilot flying” and thusly controls the throttle. The fuel shutoffs are on the left side, well clear of the range of motion throttle operation for the right seat.

    If the Captain were controlling throttles, it for some reason he could contort his wrist to accidentally open the red cutoff switch guards, the switches themselves move in the opposite direction of the pivot of the switch guard. And to have that happen to both switches — one second apart. That would be astronomically (not to mention anatomically) improbable: you can’t have your hand on the throttle and also be dragging your arm on the switches unless the pilot has an extra elbow.

    Further more, the 787 has auto throttles, at takeoff the pilot advances the throttles to N1, then all the way through climb out the auto throttles control the throttle unless manually disengaged.

    Also a “bumpy runway” wouldn’t do anything because if those switches were activated on the roll out, the engines would shut down almost immediately: that’s the point of those switches to kill fuel flow immediately not minutes later.

    And no there isn’t a report of the safety locks not working properly on the 787. The report to which you are referring was in 2018 and that was an issue with a very few 737 switches that were improperly installed. The switches didn’t fail after use, they were bad at install time. Exceedingly unlikely that a 787 was flying for 12 years with faulty switches. (Notwithstanding the fact they they are completely different part numbers.)

    The 787 that crashed had been in service since 2013 which means if that were a problem in that plane, however unlikely, with hundreds of thousands of flight hours, inspections, and the 2018 Airworthiness Bulletin — that problem would have been detected and corrected years ago.

This user hasn’t submitted anything.