Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | toddmorey's commentslogin

It’s interesting to remember Apple used to orient the logo so that it was upside down when opened.

That looks right to you as you open the laptop, but wrong to everyone else. Now when you’re in a coffee shop, all the little metal promotional billboards are correct.


Classic Thinkpad use to do that as well. A reasoning I've read somewhere (here perhaps ?): the laptop is here to serve you, not be an advertisement.

It used to be!

Check your local classifieds for « DY » laptops, you’ll find a lot of hp computers for this exact reason !

It seems that other laptop manufacturers were doing the same thing around the turn of the century, although usually not as prominently.

In the OJ Simpson trail IBM made a sbecial thinkpad for the judge so the logo would be right side up on tv.

A wise laptop manufacturer would choose a logo which looks the same both ways up.

Or put the logo on a pivot so it's always right side up no matter the orientation of the laptop.

It also looks wrong to the owner as they return to their table without closing it. Which is quite common.

I see many, many startups that promise to be an automated marketing agent that will do this exact thing: scour sites for conversations and post links to your product.

Obviously that burns down the human Internet, but it’s also a business that will have a short lifespan and bring about its own demise.

I guess they don’t care about anything enduring as long as they can grab some quick cash on the way out.


> I guess they don’t care about anything enduring as long as they can grab some quick cash on the way out.

As far as I can tell, that is basically all AI-related businesses. Including those non-AI ones jumping on the bandwagon to throw all their employees in the bin and expect 10x productivity somehow: if they are right and these tools do become that good, well the economy as we know it is over as white collar knowledge work disappears.

But hey, we made money in those few years right!


At least in the US very few industries actually seem to be about making a product.

A good example is this, car companies don't make cars for the most part, they make loans. Financial companies first, car companies second.

Consolidation, collusion, and rent-seeking behaviors by companies are going out of control too. The fact AI companies can do what they are doing has much to do with the previous brick and mortar businesses weakening any business regulations down to nothing.


> A good example is this, car companies don't make cars for the most part, they make loans. Financial companies first, car companies second.

I get that this is true from a certain point of view. But car companies clearly compete in a very healthy way on features and quality.

In fact, cars are a great example of a market where the companies clearly care about making the product, and the competition between them has driven that products to incredible heights. Cars these days are vastly better than they were in the past.


It accounts for 3% of the economy and provides around 15 million jobs. That’s absolutely going to make a dent.

And international tourism supports local tourism. I think Las Vegas will continue to be a shell of what it was until international tourism rebounds.

BEA used to have these cool interactive tables on GDP by industry, but they’ve now been discontinued. It really feels like our current administration just does not like public data.


Edit: I do think it’s fair to say our economy is much more diversified and resilient to a drop in tourism then a country like Spain where it’s closer to 20% GDP.

But maybe the right way to frame it is it wouldn’t be felt as much nationally, but international tourism drops are pretty catastrophic to local economies of some of our biggest cities like New York Miami and Los Angeles Angeles.


How much of that 3% is from foreign tourists versus domestic Americans?

And what types of jobs are those 15 million? High paid high skilled or low pay low skilled?

Because from what I can tell you about EU tourism jobs, most jobs tourism creates over here are low pay, hard labor, unskilled jobs, mostly filled by minimum wage migrant seasonal workers who then send the money back home, meaning the biggest beneficiaries from those jobs are the wealthy land/business owners who exploit cheap mirant labor, and not the local workforce who mostly suffers gentrification as they don't work in low pay tourist jobs and have to deal with increased rents from tourism on top.

Plus, the massive black economy tourism creates where a lot of the money is under the table and avoids the tax man further compounds to the problem. So I doubt much of the US working class will suffer from a tourism stagnation.

@HEmanZ: Did you read anything I said? Who's losing their job when almost all tourism jobs are done by foreign seasonal workers? The locals mostly aren't losing any job because they don't work in tourism due to pay and work conditions.

Are you using the same logic to cry for the western workers making clothes and sneakers who lost their jobs to Asian sweatshops? Do you think they miss that type of jobs and would want them back?


> How much of that 3% is from foreign tourists versus domestic Americans?

Probably all of it since tourism was 11% of total GDP in 2023, a third of that being international tourism would be on par with european averages.


Where did you get 11% GDP from. Google says 3%.


nvm i'm dumb, i can't read a chart: https://www.statista.com/statistics/292518/contribution-of-t...

2023: 2.36T (i misread and took 2024 prediction)

https://www.statista.com/statistics/188105/annual-gdp-of-the...

2023: 27.7

2.36 / 27.7 * 100 ~ 8.5

so 8.5 percent, not 11

I don't have a paid access to the website since 2021, so i can't look at the primary/secondary data, but it never failed me, and doesn't have the bias more political economic institutes has, so i mostly take data from there. If you have different data i will take them.


Ok so if that labor was someone’s job, that implies they couldn’t get something better for them. If you’re straight eliminating those jobs and now they have to take something even worse for them (lower pay, worse hours, worse personal satisfaction, etc)


Did you read anything I said? Who's losing their job when almost all tourism jobs are done by foreign seasonal workers? The locals mostly aren't losing any job because they don't work in tourism due to pay and work conditions.

Are you using the same logic to cry for the western workers making clothes and sneakers who lost their jobs to Asian sweatshops? Do you think they miss that type of jobs and would want them back?


“ For years, you’ve sat in front of a rectangle, moving tinier rectangles, only to learn that AI can now move those rectangles 10x better. As someone outside the equity class, you begin to wonder what your role is in this new paradigm. And whether rectangles were ever your ticket to happiness in the first place.”

Best summation of my current feelings yet.


VSCode opens single files outside of projects. What do they do? Personally I wouldn’t mind if it just defaulted to the settings of the last-used vault.


If you don't have a window open, then VSCode opens with no active workspace. There are no workspace settings at all, and there is no file tree. But since VSCode has user level settings, these are what is used, including theming/etc.

If you have a window open, the file is opened to the workspace for that window. You can see this in action because the "Trust" dialog specifically says that you're trying to open untrusted files into a trusted workspace.


What is obsidian beyond a pile of markdown files without the app?


I’m worried that opportunities like this to build fun/interesting software over models are evaporating.

A service just like this maybe 3 years ago would have been the coolest and most helpful thing I discovered.

But when the same 2 foundation models do the heavy lifting, I struggle to figure out what value the rest of us in the wider ecosystem can add.

I’m doing exactly this by feeding the papers to the LLMs directly. And you’re right the results are amazing.

But more and more what I see on HN feels like “let me google that for you”. I’m sorry to be so negative!

I actually expected a world where a lot of specialized and fine-tuned models would bloom. Where someone with a passion for a certain domain could make a living in AI development, but it seems like the logical endd game in tech is just absurd concentration.


I hear you. At the same time, I think we're on the cusp of a Cambrian explosion of creativity and there's a lot of opportunity. But we need to think about it differently; which is hard to do since the software industry hasn't changed much in a generation.

It wouldn't surprise me if we start to see software having much shorter shelf-lives. Maybe they become like songs, or memes.

I'm very long on human creativity. The faster we can convert ideas into reality, the faster new ideas come.


The ethics are exactly what the DoD is complaining about. They want any legal action to not be obstructed by guardrails.


Forget legal, they want any action to not be obstructed by guardrails.


I don't think it's sanctimonious to say, hey, I don't want the technology I work on to be used for targeting decisions when executing people from the sky. Especially as the tech starts to play more active roles. You know governments will be quick to shift blame to the model developers when things go wrong.


> I don't want the technology I work on to be used for targeting decisions when executing people from the sky

one problem i have with this specific case and Anthropic/Claude working with the DOD is I feel an LLM is the wrong tool for targeting decisions. Maybe given a set of 10 targets an LLm can assist with compiling risks/reward and then prioritizing each of the 10 targets but it seems like there would be much faster and better way to do that than asking an LLM. As for target acquisition and identification, i think an LLM would be especially slow and cumbersome vs one of the many traditional ML AIs that already exist. DOD must be after something else.


> I don't want the technology I work on to be used for targeting decisions when executing people from the sky

What do you do when the government come to you and tell you that they do want that, and can back it up with threats such as nationalizing your technology? (see Anthropic)

We're back to "you might not care about politics, but that won't stop politics caring about you".


I know this is a foreign concept to some, but you can have a backbone.

Challenge it in court. Move the company to a different jurisdiction. Burn everything down and refuse to comply.


> I know this is a foreign concept to some, but you can have a backbone. Challenge it in court. Move the company to a different jurisdiction. Burn everything down and refuse to comply.

Challenge in court is fine, even healthy.

Threatening to burn everything down and refuse to comply might well work; simply daring Trump to a game of Russian Roulette about this popping the bubble that's only just managing to keep the US economy out of recession, on the basis that he TACOs a lot, I can see it working in a way it wouldn't if he were a sane leader making the same actual demands just for sane reasons.

Move the company to a different jurisdiction? That would have worked if AI was a few hundred people and a handful of servers, as per classic examples of:

  At the height of its power, Kodak employed more than 140,000 people and was worth $28 billion. They even invented the first digital camera. But today Kodak is bankrupt, and the new face of digital photography has become Instagram. When Instagram was sold to Facebook for a billion dollars in 2012, it employed only 13 people. Where did all those jobs disappear? And what happened to the wealth that all those middle class jobs created?
- Jaron Lanier, "Who Owns the Future?", https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/21526102-who-owns-the-...

But (I think) now that AI needs new data centres so fast and on such a scale that they're being held back by grid connection and similar planning permission limits, this isn't a viable response.

They can be burned down, but I think they can't realistically be moved at this point. That said, I guess it depends on how much Anthropic relies on their own data centres vs. using 3rd parties, given Amazon's announced AWS sovereign cloud in Europe?


Yeah that sentence struck me as very carefully worded. They also don't mention how often RA is needed or invoked. We'll encounter a lot of these autonomous systems (cars, robots, equipment) that escalate decisions and edge cases to human employees until they are trained enough that reliability goes up.


It's tricky to give a number for "RA required" that isn't wildly misleading, or contextualize one you're given. The common case for most AV RAs is confirmation of what the vehicle already has planned. Does that count as "required"?

An AV company can also tune how proactive vehicles are in reaching out to RA for confirmation, which is a balancing act between incident rate, stoppages, RA availability, and rider metrics. There's other ways to tune RA rate by also adjusting when and where the vehicles operate, which comes down to standard taxi fleet management tools (e.g. price and availability).

Waymo chooses a target that they're comfortable with and probably changes it every so often, but those numbers aren't the only possible targets and they're not necessarily well-correlated to the system's "true" capabilities (which are themselves difficult to understand).


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: