Preferences

tomxor
Joined 10,376 karma

  1. > The idea is unsettling because it reframes human agency

    Not really, it's called discovery, aka science.

    This weird framing is just perpetuating the idea of LLMs being some kind of magic pixie dust. Stop it.

  2. Terrible comparison.

    Horses and cars had a clearly defined, tangible, measurable purpose: transport... they were 100% comparable as a market good, and so predicting an inflection point is very reasonable. Same with Chess, a clearly defined problem in finite space with a binary, measurable outcome. Funny how Chess AI replacing humans in general was never considered as a serious possibility by most.

    Now LLMs, what is their purpose? What is the purpose of a human?

    I'm not denying some legitimate yet tedious human tasks are to regurgitate text... and a fuzzy text predictor can do a fairly good job of that at less cost. Some people also think and work in terms of text prediction more often than they should (that's called bullshitting - not a coincidence).

    They really are _just_ text predictors, ones trained on such a humanly incomprehensible quantity of information as to appear superficially intelligent, as far as correlation will allow. It's been 4 years now, we already knew this. The idea that LLMs are a path to AGI and will replace all human jobs is so far off the mark.

  3. > Road upkeep is from general taxation. Road tax was abolished in 1937

    I was skeptical of this being true since fuel duty is notoriously high in the UK, so I did a quick fact check.

    Based on the change in 1937 you are "technically" correct, in that none of the motoring taxes are ring fenced for road funds since 1937.

    However the opposite is true of what you are implying... income from fuel duty alone is generally around 3 times larger than all road maintenance spending (a fairly steady +25bn/yr [0] Vs -8bn/yr [1] over the last decade).

    In other words, although it's officially one big tax pot, motoring taxes pay for road network expenditure more than 3 times over.

    This is why they are introducing the per mile EV tax, because fuel duty provided a proportional tax to road use, but EVs skip that and electricity can't be so easily taxed for road use specifically.

    TLDR, UK road users pay for far more than the road network.

    [0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/284323/united-kingdom-hm...

    [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/533171/annual-road-trans...

  4. Thanks :D I like working with people who appreciate simple solutions.

    This sort of response to complex solutions used to be more prevalent on HN. When I got downvoted I was like "..this is the end isn't it" :P Maybe the unix way is a dying strategy IDK, but you give me hope.

    > FWIW, I think this project was vibe coded with an LLM, but if it works, it works, so it makes no difference to me.

    I did not realise that, I'd be far more worried about running it than most human coded projects out of fear of it doing something destructive. Not that humans don't make mistakes, but at least they have a mental model and intent. I suppose it depends on the definition of "vibe coded" I've heard some people talk about sending the LLM off into a loop and then trying to use the result, whereas if you are just using it as a more powerful autocomplete and playing captain then that's a lot better.

  5. Forgot that was a bash feature..

      ls | xargs -I % bash -c 'cd %; pwd; [[ $(git status -s) ]] && echo WIP || echo clean'
  6.   ls | xargs -I % sh -c 'cd %; pwd; [[ $(git status -s) ]] && echo WIP || echo clean'
  7.   ls | xargs -I % sh -c 'cd %; pwd; git status -s'
  8. Armed and dangerous until proven chips.
  9. btop is a worthy and missing contender.

    It looks quite fancy but I actually like it more for it's functionality, particularly it's tree view for navigating the processes list. I'm not a big fan of full multicolor in these kinds of tools and so appreciate how easy it is to flip to grey scale mode from the built in colour schemes (even from the TUI settings menu).

  10. > as they are the bill payer and entering into a credit agreement requires you to be over 18. If you wanted belt and braces the phone companies doing PAYG could set it to disabled unless you authenticate your age to avoid the "buy simcard for cash" loophole.

    This is already the case in UK, has been for years. The bill payer needs to prove age with an ID to lift IP level blocks from some default age blocklist.

    It doesn't work well because obviously a lot of internet is shared amongst a household, and the blocklist is too broad to make it annoying enough that any adults will remove it. Then of course you can always just use a VPN same as with the current situation.

  11. There are various international economic laws, treaties and agreements between cooperating countries, whether or not any of them cover this scenario for to US, and whether the US would honour any agreement in the current political climate remains to be seen. But there are mechanisms in place that allow w the UK to reach US companies through each others legal systems to a degree and vice versa, regardless of asset location.
  12. > Components are bad for web accessibility (aria- property fatigue).

    I've been using web components as a vehicle to automate and auto validate accessibility aspects as much as possible, because I think the only way to truly make things sustainably accessible is to find a way to unburden the developer by either inferring as much as possible or making validation a natural part of development rather than a separate testing cycle that will invariably cause accessibility support to become out of sync.

    It sounds like you might have similar concerns. Do you have any insights to share along these lines for Gooey?

  13. > And proprietary browser plugins, really? So you're not looking to reduce complexity after all, then?

    Maybe they haven't lived through the world of pain that was Silverlight, Flash and Java Applets et al. I suppose from a more innocent position without any history it might seem like a good idea to break complexity out into little modules, but the reality was poor integration, more platform lockin, and a security nightmare.

  14. [flagged]
  15. > > the worst offender (by far) > This is disputable.

    It really isn't. This has been argued to death, this is the point of this article (to provide data) because so many people (fans or not) buy into Apple's marketing, token browser feature releases and virtue signalling. They even have the cheek to boast about Safari's a11y feature releases while simultaneously ignoring long standing bugs that have broken overall a11y experience for years. To anyone on the ground who's been making web content and apps for a decade its clear as day, for everyone else Apple has done a good job of making it very unclear what's going on.

    > Nobody is giving Apple a "free pass". I started by saying literally, "I have no wish to defend Apple." I also said, "Nobody has clean hands here, not Apple".

    Yes, then go on to describe and focus on a "monopolistic landscape", and paint a picture where Apple is just another generic, monopolistic, self serving player - while completely ignoring the reality of the affect those individual players have on the web - which the article actually does investigate, but you would rather discount it's evidence because the author is involved enough in the ecosystem to have insight and form a strong opinion.

    In summary you seem to be rejecting an evidence based argument (but not due to it's evidence), in favour of a philosophical perspective, entirely in the abstract, absent of detail, that equalises responsibility. To me that feels like giving Apple a pretty big free pass.

    > I would note that the US Department of Justice is currently pursuing two monopoly cases against Google and suggested that Google should divest Chrome.

    Yes, and I would agree, but that does not negate the reality of Apple's far worse affects on the web. I (also) don't want to defend any of them, but if you want to get philosophical, Google's monopoly is more aligned with the interest of web users', yes they will try to throw anti user and anti-competitive things in there (and they should be shamed for that), but they have also done a ton of work to move the platform forward, not out of the goodness of their heart, but that's the reality. Compare that to Apple's business, which is not aligned with the interest of web users', quite the opposite. Both companies manipulate the web in ways that benefit their business, it just happens that Apple's is so negatively aligned with the web that they do so through inaction while anti-competitively blocking other vendors, and blocking standards progression.

  16. No, the worst offender (by far) does not get a free pass just because the world is not perfect.

    All of the main contributors have corporate interest and are not acting out of the goodness of their hearts, yes. But Apple's level of anti competitive, vertically integrated, gaslighting bullshit goes above and beyond.

  17. > 1. Unreliable Ordering

    If you think this is only a problem for distributed systems, I have bad news for you.

This user hasn’t submitted anything.