skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Apple TV is a decent option. It's got default apps for Apple's content platforms, of course, but they're easy to ignore. Default screensaver is tasteful aerial videos (no ads), and the home screen layout can be customized to stash the default apps away in a folder.

You don't need to own other Apple devices to use an Apple TV. If you do, though, there's some convenient integrations, like being able to use an iPhone as a remote, play audio through your AirPods, or stream audio/video from your phone or computer to the TV.
> I am turned off whenever there is a handy new tool for us to use and then some people come up with reasons why using the new tool is a harmful thing to do.

So we shouldn't investigate (theoretically and practically) potential harmful effects of a new effects? Should we treat with coldness (dare I say disgust) anyone who dares?

You know, there is a big hole in the ozone layer that is now closing (or at least no expanding over the whole planet) because some poor researchers went against the grain and investigated all effects of this new invention called CFCs.
> Fast food raising prices beyond the point where it's a discount relative to better food anymore. A critical mass of consumers is now so passive and docile that they don't change behavior as they're boiled alive.

Sad and self-correcting by self-eliminating consumers. But that will take time and smaller markets are a net negative for the survivors.
Yeah I’ve seen that before many times and usually they’re moonlighting. So it’s not career immolation necessarily, it’s more like double dipping.
I've been thinking a lot about free software ideologies and how licensing is used to somewhat reclaim a legal framework that has mostly aligned itself with property and money.

I found the DiBona's explanation quite jarring.

With the AGPL, you have to be very, very careful with how it is expressed. Otherwise you have to invoke the sharing in many different places. [The ban] is really about saving engineering time.
No Datadome Javascript:

https://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?d=2912161048829&w=CPHjj391EJ...
Then they leave
If I was the power distribution owner I would not trust the drone meters. Probably would need some type of load profiling on the distribution side, then all the drone has to do is authenticate a valid customer id for billing.
> AI hasn't changed a thing about my job

> ChatGPT helps me do something in 2 minutes that might have taken me 30 minutes to figure out

Increasing productivity by 1500% sounds pretty earth-shattering to me.

What would you rather see instead?
Ya, mean, what happened with the invent of the calculator? Sure maybe basic math skills declined…but i think i grasp relativity more than my father does and ever will…
This is a classic prisoner’s dilemma, and you’re advocating for both sides to hit “betray”.

Perhaps if enough drones did this, they would indeed bury the lines. But that would be strictly worse than a world in which they didn’t bury them, and drones don’t steal electricity regardless.
The problem is it is often very expensive to adapt other components to fit the inflexible platform.

In your example, the customer may have had software that depended on the routers having some functionality that the cloud native routers didn't. Sure if they had designed for that cloud from the beginning it wouldn't be a big deal. But now, that $2M might be less than the cost of changing all their other systems to work around the limitations of the cloud native router. I've seen situations play out like that a few times.
With enough effort, you can get it to suggest the use of nuclear weapons in a hypothetical scenario. The hypothetical I posited to it were virtual simulations of Hell a la certain factions in The Culture series:

https://imgur.com/a/XdrymGO
Let's take that a step farther and have the drone implement direct coupling and charge while flying near the power lines.
For me it’s the unspoken assumption that “step 0” (attain wealth in the first place) is left as an exercise to the reader. A given. It’s all so self aggrandizing and tone deaf.
Yes I know that. That only makes it worse.
Sounds like the answer is no, such a thing does not exist.

I wonder if this is because consumers wont actually pay for it, or because the market is unable to deliver it (due to money grabs, etc)?
This is a very balanced opinion. I will add a more radical tone: if you pursue your true intellectual dreams in academia you will surely find all kinds of obstacles and probably fail.
> Coming from academia, as I was more or less, this was a valuable lesson.

Academia, where there is a reasonable budget but it’s completely impossible to spend is as the cycle of meetings, emails and fucking around is eternal.
Not if you put a large enough resistor in the line. It might be enough just to extend a spike to bleed off charge, though.
The recent addition of VPN support, including Tailscale, has made Apple TV even more compelling. VLC exists for Apple TV.

For purchased movies, Apple TV does not impose silly geo-restrictions, unlike Vudu and MoviesAnywhere.
Sometimes, I like to open The GIMP so I can take the logo for the Coq proof assistant, export it and commit it into the HEAD of my Git repository.

I think the weird names are fine, it's the management that needs fixing.
I agree we want to democratize AI and we should be very, very weary of powerful people trying to get a monopoly on AI.

But I'm not ready to say absolutely everything should immediately be shared with everyone. At least not until it's clear we know what we're dealing with.

I know it can be hard to trust people but the fact is we have to. Even today, there are many people with the power to end the world (nuclear weapons, viruses etc) but we trust the people who have these capabilities not to abuse their power. We do this because we don't want anyone to have the right to launch nuclear weapons. And I think that's wise.

I definitely don't know for sure but AI may be another one of these technologies.

Either way, you can fight against regulatory capture, the downsides of capitalism etc without being an open source absolutist.
No Datadome Javascript:

https://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?d=5454861868361&w=cbXy8JTteH...
Knew a guy interviewed there - said the whole place had an unsettling vibe. Weird interview, lots of indirect questioning, like they were waiting for him to say something. Easy to guess why.

That place should be closed for good.
Deconstructing capitalism and the state = killing yourself?

Deconstructing capitalism but preserving the state = purging millions of people?

Preserving capitalism and the state = killing millions of poor people?

Preserving capitalism but deconstructing the state = killing millions of poor people, but cyberpunk?
I am just trying to correct you in places, where from my point of view you are wrong. I am pretty familiar with FAR 61,65,105 and USPA SIM and IRM.

You said - it is not regulated: I corrected, that there are FAR chapters about parachuting in the USA, actually SIM has all of them highlighted https://www.uspa.org/sim/9 and USPA exists with a set of rules and recommendations. Ah, and FAR mentions TSO, which are the requirements for the gear to be used for skydiving (TSO approved rigs and reserve canopies). I do believe this is more than enough for us skydivers.

Do you want more regulations? But why Skydiving? Why not skiing, kite surfing, surfing, mountain biking? Have you looked at the "regulations" about water sports? Why are those not regulated? Those other sports don't have injuries? How many people are getting hurt by other skiers on the mountain?
Advertising is also convenient camouflage for data collection.
The 320 and 540 had a few nice things going for them: You could option them with the same 1600SW monitor that the higher-end O2 workstations used without having to use the fiddly multilink. SGI paid Microsoft for a HAL license and did a better job with multiprocessor than what you got from installing the vanilla version.
Why would it be important? This doesn't seem to be a case where a state is doing anything (it's shops), nor are the shops making their own currency (they accept payment in USD, the vehicle for that is just not physical paper).
> fast food raising prices beyond the point where it’s a discount relative to better food anymore.

Fast food has usually been more expensive than (not just “not at a discount to”) better food, ceteris paribus, because you are paying for “fast” in both money and quality.

It is less expensive than better food that also has higher grades of service when the demand for service at the level at issue is sufficiently great compared to the demand for speed.
Sounds distinctly like a Bay Area/populated city thing.
Storing a whole bunch of version of a directory, with parent versions, isn't that complicated.

Easily accessing, rearranging, and merging the changes between those versions gets complicated, but git isn't actually very good at those parts!
> It's wild to know the movie Apollo 13 is closer now to the events than to the present.

In hindsight, it seems like the middle of the 20th century was right in the middle of an "S-curve" for societal change and technology advancement. Anyone who grew up in the 2nd half of the century thought it was completely normal. But now that we're somewhat removed from that era, it's more like completely bizarre to consider how much things changed in how little time.

The 90s when Apollo 13 came out were an interesting time in their own right because that's right around when the societal change started slowing down. Anyone who grew up in the late 80s and early 90s in particular probably doesn't even think of the 90s as being particularly "old". A lot of the same fashions and music styles that we have today had already emerged, at least in primitive forms. Cell phones and computers and the Internet were becoming mainstream. In a lot of ways, the late 90s and early 00s seem more familiar and similar to today than they do to the 1960s.

It's weird to imagine a world where major life-altering advancements aren't happening every decade (no, AI is not one of them, at least not yet). That's been the norm for over a century now, but it's come to some kind of an end. We are entering new cultural territory.
I've thought this too.
I've just been watching From the Earth to the Moon (1998) these past few days, go check it out if you haven't, I had never heard of it.
I’ll also vote for Apple TV. It also acts as a hub for simple home automation if you just want a few light bulbs or something, or you want to store security camera footage directly to iCloud.
This is a great change coming from Apple. I was initially surprised by this considering how Apple usually dislikes it when you want to find a way to run your own binaries on iOS devices.
Anecdotally, the idea of a career is dying among many I know. People just want the money.

So some of it is probably being Overemployed. I have a job where I am just doing the minimum to keep it.

Some of it is just waiting to be fired while their build their own businesses.
> They cause higher prices for everyone (even for the rewards recipients).

Honestly no. Price is relative. The sticker price might change, but the effective price depends on the customer. Largely generalized: Low-credit customers essentially subsidize the cost for high-credit customers. Let me explain:

So let's call the current price: p.

- The cash customer pays: p

- The rewards card user pays p - 1% (because they get cashback)

- The mid-level rewards customer pays p - 2%

- The premium reward users pay p - 5%

Now let's say that reward cards are banned. No more rewards cards. Let's call the new price (after rewards cards and their associated fees are removed) as 'n'. What would happen?

Scenario A: No Change

Now I believe if you got rid of rewards cards, then n = p. Merchants wouldn't lower prices, they would just keep them the same and pocket the difference. So now everyone loses, except for cash customers who are unchanged. But everyone pays p, which is at best the same as before, and at worse 5%+ more expensive by getting rid of rewards cards.

Scenario B: Utopia, the Merchants Care

Let's make the argument you are making, which is that maybe the merchants would be nice and give us a cut of the rewards card savings. This would save them maybe 1%. I suspect slightly less on average, but let's call it 1% to be generous.

So in scenario B: n = p - 1%

Yes cash customers win! They pay 1% less than before. But the majority of customers still lose. Cash customers are the only winners. Normal rewards card users are paying the same amount they were before. The bell curve of card users are probably paying 1% more, while the high-end premium card users are paying 4%+ more than before. The majority of consumer still lose, only cash customers come out ahead.

This scenario of course assumes that merchants are generous and pass on the savings. If this did happen, you would likely notice savings for a year or two at most, due to economics and market forces.

Eventually, like I said above. The price just becomes normalized and the price is the price once again. House or car prices go up slightly at first because of more money in customer pockets, employers are less pressured to give out high raises, so maybe income raises are 0.5% on average lower that year, and 0.3% lower the next year and 0.2% lower the year following (which actually makes it look like raises are increasing YoY other than the first year). This continues and 3 years later that 1% gain is normalized into the economy and becomes the new baseline and we are back where we started.

So no, everyone does not lose with rewards cards. There are winners and losers. You could argue that lower income customers (the ones most likely to pay with cash or low-end credit cards) pay the price for the higher-income customers (the ones most likely to have 800+ credit scores with premium cards).

So, largely generalized you could argue that low-credit customers subsidize the price of goods for high-credit customers. I think that's a more accurate argument. And to be clear, I'm not stating that it's fair, just that it's accurate.
>but I strongly disagree that it is a bad thing for individuals to sometimes save time and sometimes get better results

you shouldn't really use tools to save time or 'sometimes' get better results, because that's an indication of a sort of laziness. When you use powerful tools you need to understand exactly in what way they save you time or effort, what their failure modes are, otherwise they become pathways for exploitation.

The recent backdoor is a good example of this. People pile automation and tool chains in software on top of each other but don't bother to actually verify what comes through them, and so rather than leverage for them they became leverage for someone else. If you use LLMs to process information faster but someone feeds you garbage you're now the fastest consumer of garbage. There's nothing worse than a gullible user with a powerful tool.

And given that the general attitude we have nowadays is that tools are a sort of thing that allow you to turn your brain off, rather than understanding that you need to be smarter and more critical and more alert the more tools you use, it's very reasonable to be extremely conservative about adopting new tools.
First thing that comes to mind is a NUC. Just install the desktop OS of your choice.
I'm working on a rebuild of an existing app. The existing app works great, but hasn't changed for like 5 years so management thinks it's "outdated". They paid a design firm to make a "modern" design, but it honestly looks worse and hasn't been thought through at all on a practical level. The old app had a tightly coupled front end and back end. The new app is using the same back end via a non-RESTful API that has a lot of non-sensical dependencies on the old front end. There are a series of other really bad decisions made in the rebuild process, and the whole project is now almost a year behind schedule. The end result is going to be buggy, slow, and far less useful than the old app. But hey, they are giving me a steady stream of billable work, and keep paying me, so who am I to question the logic of management?
Then why the "targeted" ads and data harvesting? For all the effort, ads are still mostly totally irrelevant and may as well be random.
In response to a comment about creatures depending on light.
Ooh, I forgot to mention VLC! Their Apple TV app is great -- if you've got a SMB file server, it can browse the server and play videos in basically any format.
Nothing on the computer does any more. There's too much overhead, too much administrivia, too much regulation to feel the same as popping up a Perl script into the CGI-BIN via FTP once did.

To some degree, I scratch that same itch and feel the excitement of creation manufacturing physical goods at home now. A laser cutter, 3D printer, sublimation printer and heat press are the tools. I'm designing parts and having the laser/printer produce them, like writing code and seeing an app run.
For this public demonstration, sure.

I’m curious how you think power companies are supposed to be aware of entities leeching off transmission lines?
What was the hype-cycle between GANs and diffusion?
The death knell of gentrification, unable to hold back the unwashed masses of new Yorker the average soufilly guido retreats below Oregon (his family all moved to Gloucester County)
There is definitely current or there would be no wattage.
I think this needs a lot more clarification than is provided in this thread.

If you run it locally, and only you use it, then you won't get blocked - a given search engine will see about the same number of requests as if you used it directly.

Add a few house members and you'll still be fine.

(I ran the original searx for a year or two locally - no issues at all).
> Personally, I was looking forward to never talking about this topic again.

It seems like you are not alone in that sentiment. Would it be fair to call this willful blindness or something else?

> My mind melted during the pandemic after hearing arguments against the use of untested vaccines and the very same people in support of using untested drugs.

Can you elaborate on why you view those arguments as contradictory? They seemed to be more about informed consent than testing standards.
That kind of logic seems to make sense at first, but just confirms my point: trying to change IPv4 to suit you is a fools errand. Change what you do to hit ordinary bog-standard IPv4 instead and miraculously you’ll have fewer impediments.
Every project except the last one.
Kagi does that.