skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
> The question is, why is it so infeasible to enter the market?

It is capital intensive, so that is a hurdle, but capital isn't that hard to come by if you are doing something compelling. It was downright easy in the 2010s.

Regulation is the biggest problem. It is straight up against the law to become a direct competitor in computing. Even with all the necessary resources, just try to build an iPhone clone, but with the addition of Y, and see how long you can go before lawyers start breathing down your neck. If you make the first day, I'll be impressed.

You can try to compete indirectly with something kind of the same but different enough to skirt the laws, but that's rarely what the market wants, making it difficult to justify the effort and capital utilization. You need something truly game changing to consider venturing down that road.
It's clearly intended to impact new buyers. Most of Musk's wealth is tied up in Tesla, and that funding allowed him to both buy an election and -- gestures broadly -- demonstrate convincingly that he is an absolutely reprehensible, garbage-bin of a human.

The rich used to start ivy leagues and build libraries. This guy is cutting off funding for the poor and declaring himself, proudly, a "deadly threat" to people he perceives as "woke".

And the "99%" thing is pretty dubious regardless. Elon Musk has been a garbage person for years. A self-dealing creep. >80% of Tesla sales have happened over the past four years.

And of the people I know with Teslas, zero of them are "green, left-leaning" buyers. They're people who wanted the novelty with the crazy acceleration and the boasting tech. I feel like this "leftist car" thing was never, ever true for the brand. And if it was sales would have been 0 for the past six years or so, but there are an endless rank of daytraders and crypto bros who need their Teslas.
Reminds me of the time I wrote a jailbreak tweak for iPhone to send more types of notifications to Pebble back in 2013:

https://www.engadget.com/2013-02-14-hack-brings-all-iphone-n...

https://github.com/conradev/btnotificationenabler

This has been a problem for a long time.
I think that's a good ruling.

Say I create a website that just sells AI generated logos. I set up some automation so I'm constantly generating millions of logos per day.

I also have a bot that scrapes the web to try and find anyone using a logo similar to the ones on my website, and then send legal threats demanding payment for copying my artwork.

I'm sure more imaginative scammers will find a way to copyright troll using AI.
I wonder if I supply a random input to a fine-tuned model that can only generate what I wanted initially.

I.e. the model named "starry-night-van-gough-with-bunny" can generate only one image.
> As a customer I would like to be able to make that decision.

You can. There are dozens (hundreds?) of phones you can buy that aren’t an iPhone. It’s been well known for nearly 20 years at this point that iPhones are more closed than the competition (of which, again, there is a lot). They are successful because of this, not in spite of it, contrary to internet belief.
Go fash lose cash?
This is pretty much the exact same case as the monkey that took a photo. The photo is now in the public domain as the monkey cannot be an author of the photo and since the photographer didn't take the photo, neither is he the author. The US Copyright Office clarified that "only works created by a human can be copyrighted under United States law, which excludes photographs and artwork created by animals or by machines without human intervention". If you placed some food on a camera trigger and the animal reached for it, taking a photo in the process, that would likely be human intervention. I feel as if this applies to AI as well. A computer cannot be the author but as long as it was a human that told the computer to make the image or wrote the code that allowed the computer to generate the image on its own, then the human is the author.

Trying to assign copyright to an AI is techno-futurist bullshit by trying to give legal presence to a piece of software. What's next? Shutting down an AI is murder? Give it a rest.
The article is light on technical details. Anyone have details on what this architecture is, and what makes it "next gen"?
"Regulation" is a dirty word because most regulations are written by captured regulators. The last thing you want is new rules that permanently entrench the incumbent duopoly while pretending that you can tame Godzilla to keep as a pet if only the right chains are used.

You need rules that restore actual competition. Accept no substitute.
Are we not going to count: Gnu Knew New
I think people forget that Apple is not making devices for the Hackernews community. They are making devices for people that just want something that works pretty well and has reasonable security - even to the extent of protecting them from themselves. They have other things to do with their time than learn about security vulnerabilities and how to avoid them. They want to just click 'yes' on every popup and expect things to keep working. Because they know that they are not qualified to answer that yes/no popup question. And those people do not care much about lock-in and walled gardens. They are not interested in jailbreaking and sideloading apps. They've never heard of Pebble or have any interest in it.

This is 90% of humanity, including people we all know and love.

Apple serves these people pretty well.
There seems to be some tremendous confusion here. The vast majority of Alexa-family devices perform no local processing except for the activation word ("Alexa"). I didn't even realize that some of the more recent devices supported an opt-in for local processing.

This kind of makes sense, at least to me: local processing will always be limited. The entire premise of the original Echo devices was that all the magic happened in the cloud. It seems like not much has really changed?
pikachu_surprised.jpg
>GP didn't even address this

Yes they did, when they said they were amazed that Apple dodged anti-trust lawsuits. I said that from the rest of their post it seemed like they acknowledged that competition existed, they just didn't want to use Android options. The legitimate anti-trust example they gave (LTT/Floatplane) is from an app developer perspective (not a smart phone and watch buyer), which is why I talked about that.

> I'm sure that's not true. Most people choose to buy an iPhone because it's an iPhone. No one is going to buy an iPhone because Apple Watch works and Garmin watches don't work (as well).

I didn't say that people buy iPhones because other watch brands don't work well, I said that they buy iPhones knowing that the other watch brands didn't work, and it still doesn't deter them. But they had the information available when they made their choice.

> I feel like your parenthetical refutes any point you were trying to make in the prior sentence.

No, I said it's not like they totally changed course from being welcoming to other brands to locking them out. They were always hostile to other smartwatch makers, but I acknowledged that the article mentions that they may have gotten more hostile in recent years. Acknowledging that their hostility may exist on a spectrum doesn't refute the point that they've always been hostile to other smartwatch brands. I love that in your next paragraph you include a parenthetical that could refute your own argument though- market share is absolutely relevant. Nobody is going to bother suing a small fry over anti-competitive behavior with 0.01% market share in a healthy competitive market- the market takes care of that issue on its own.

> Android doesn't suck. It's fine. Very good even. ... It's not about Android at all

This article is partly about Android since "Apple is being restrictive" is in comparison to features that the Android API offers. They are saying that they are going to make an Apple app for the Pebble but it is not going to be as good as the Android experience.
Apple makes a mockery of their own "security promises" for iMessage by not end-to-end encrypting iMessages in iCloud by default. Ridiculous to use that as a justification to prevent users from choosing to send their messages to watches that happen to be made by someone other than Apple.
This is an incredibly useless comment [0]

At least say why you think so and contribute to the conversation a bit.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#comments
Didn't come from Twitter, it came from Dorsey. He also said that it went badly astray early on, and abandoned it completely.

https://www.piratewires.com/p/interview-with-jack-dorsey-mik...
Got me curious, I feel like it's cheaper to build a car that complies to global safety standards rather than make differing models for domestic (Chinese) and foreign markets.

At least they have 5 stars in the Euro NCAP assessment: https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/82666/euroncap-2023-byd-dolph...

And they're being sold in Mexico in N. America, for 358,800 pesos (1), which is $18,000!

(1) https://mexico.as.com/motor/byd-dolphin-mini-que-tiene-de-es...
But then how could you call that 100 profit in any way? If you made at most like 30-50?
I wonder what people mean here by "security promises" made by Apple. There is no such thing.

iMessage has been targeted for years with zero click exploits, most notably by the NSO group.

Apple’s restrictions aren’t meant to protect consumers, their purpose is to protect Apple’s profits.
could use both though, failing CI->bot->simple summary of why CI failed. even better if this happens before you've requested a reviewer
Battery life. Radios are energy-intensive, and the processing required to run "full apps" is also often pretty steep. In the meantime, while battery chemistries are getting better space is very much at a premium on one's wrist.

From the other recently-posted article, the new Pebble watches are targeting 30-day battery lives between charges. That would be unthinkable for a watch that manages its own wifi/cellular connections.
Exact systems that put people in jail would be much more terrifying, because they'd achieve simplicity by ignoring complexity. The existence of the state and federal supreme courts in the US shows the need for careful consideration of how laws interact with one another and an ever-changing world.
How would step 1 improve security over not allowing third party devices to send messages at all?
> The postgres escape function actually worked fine before this "CVE". It was documented as escaping something for use as part of a postgres query.

> BeyondTrust used it as input to the 'psql' tool, which is an interactive tool you're not really supposed to programmatically invoke, and the documentation for the postgres escape function didn't say it escaped input for psql.

But this is the documentation for psql:

> psql is a terminal-based front-end to PostgreSQL. It enables you to type in queries interactively, issue them to PostgreSQL, and see the query results. Alternatively, input can be from a file or from command line arguments. In addition, psql provides a number of meta-commands and various shell-like features to facilitate writing scripts and automating a wide variety of tasks.

We can learn two things from this:

1. You are definitely supposed to be able to invoke psql programmatically, or else the suggestion to "write scripts and automate a wide variety of tasks" would make no sense.

2. The input to psql is documented as a "query", and it seems fine to assume that a "query" for psql is the same thing as a "postgres query".
What are the limitations of integrating via notifications? That seems like the user-respecting method. For example, I don't use iMessage or SMS, but WhatsApp.
I wonder if you could synthesize a voice with TTS saying "hey siri, send a text to X saying Y", and send that over bluetooth as if it was mic input.
Two reasons:

One, adding hardware to connect to WiFi and cellular increases size and power requirements. Notably, the new Pebble 's battery is projected to last 30 days.

Two, people use phones. They want their watch to work with their phone instead of around it.
> They really do. Do you have anything other than a blind assertion to back this up?

Continued human behavior online. The actual behavior of users does not suggest they consider, on average, that their privacy is being violated every time they put more data into Facebook, Google, Amazon, etc.

If you want to use this as a case study, come back to this topic in a year and see if Alexa sales and / or usage has gone down or up. It's at about 600 million installed units and 77 million users right now (and that's after someone's Alexa dataset was used as evidence in their murder trial two years ago... If people cared, wouldn't the line go down, not up?).
It is not definitionally correct because when you or I say "domestic terrorism", despite being the same text and same sound, it is not the same as when the administration says "domestic terrorism". All they're saying is that they care to stop people damaging tesla's. Not that they are going to be stopping the dictionary definition of "domestic terrorist"
The company would have more cash in the bank when he exercises those options.

They also wouldn't have to pay to create a new pay package to replace the voided one. This process is surprisingly expensive to create and implement a CEO pay package.

There were more reasons that shareholders voted for the package in the revote, but omitting others as I don't think they are related to financials
What's crazy is this was always seen as a left wing car. If you drove one of these into small blue collar towns there is a chance you would have been harassed a few short years ago.
Carl: The First AI System to Produce Academically Peer-Reviewed Research
It hath already arrived.
Bluetooth devices can already read Messages from your iPhone with no degradation to E2EE: https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/Co...

This is just about sending.
>99% of Tesla's were sold to green, left-leaning buyers

source
Great summary, and sort of highlights how charisma is very frequently useful for deception. That's why the advice that people should "go learn to be charismatic" is very different from "learn social skills / be easy to work with / don't be a dick".

Influencing people is certainly a necessary skill to some extent, but if you're actively working on becoming very good at it, then you're not really worthy of trust almost by definition. Better get good enough so that other people can't recognize it. Check out my best-selling new book "How to lie effectively and ensure your political machinations are never fully recognized as such"
Most people are not plugged into reddit and social media politics the way we are, and simply don't care.
> insurance generally excludes riot and terrorism from coverage anyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_Risk_Insurance_Act

TRIA insurance against terrorism is required by law to be offered as a rider. It's actually shockingly affordable, because the law shifts the ultimate financial burden for any events between $200 million to $100 billion onto the federal government. So insurers have a reasonable cap on their expenses and don't need to rely on traditional re-insurers for black swan events.

Most people decline this rider anyways, no matter how cheap it is - and therefore most people are not covered for terrorism related damages.
The semiconductor supply chain is bonkers... would like to have a diagram of the whole thing, including the special quartz mine in NC
> over anyone's political preferences

I think this phrasing mellows the reality that he has, regardless of intent, displayed Nazi-like behavior. Why not tear at a company whose absentee CEO acts this way? Tesla is not the only great car or the only great car company. Let it thrive or die based on myriad factors, including leadership optics.
Don't Be Afraid of Types
Probably related: https://stories.rivian.com/meet-the-new-r1

> Our second generation R1 vehicles feature an entirely new electrical architecture and compute platform developed in-house by our hardware and software team. This significant update to our onboard computing system makes our vehicles more robust, less costly to produce and easier to service — all while improving the experience for our customers. Our new system also dramatically improves scalability for deployment in future vehicles.

> Core to the new system is a substantial reduction in the number of electronic control units (ECUs) used to control the vehicle, down from 17 different ECUs in our first generation to just seven ECUs in our second generation. This massive simplification has been achieved by shifting to a zonal architecture and by significantly increasing the computational capabilities of each of our ECUs. While infotainment, autonomy, vehicle access, drive units and our battery management system each have their own ECU, every other vehicle function is controlled by just three ECUs.

> Shifting to a zonal system enabled us to remove over 1.6 miles (2.6km) of wiring from each vehicle, shedding 44 lbs (20kg) of weight. This reduction in wiring, along with the elimination of 10 ECUs, greatly reduces production costs. Fewer components needing to be installed during assembly also improves manufacturing efficiency, allowing us to build vehicles more quickly and with better quality. With less components onboard, vehicles are easier to service and require us to stock fewer parts, improving serviceability.
And that ASML is majority owned by Carl Zeis, a German company.
Agreed. I would trade in my current vehicle for this in a heartbeat if the topspeed was 100 and not 80.
Its still Guantanamo. And we pardon people who cause damage because they dont like governmental policies in this country
Show HN: A Free AI Tool to Summarize YouTube Videos in Seconds
Hey, it’s Brendan – creator of Vid2Sum, a free AI-powered YouTube summarizer. I built this to help people save time by getting the key takeaways from long videos instantly.

You can try it here: www.vid2sum.com

I made this because, like many of you, I often find myself jumping around in YouTube videos, trying to find the most relevant parts. Instead of scrubbing through hours of content, I wanted an AI tool that could generate concise summaries in seconds.

Making this effective required optimizing three key things: accuracy, speed, and usability. The AI had to generate relevant summaries while keeping processing times low, all without overwhelming the user with too much information.

A few technical challenges:

Extracting meaningful content – YouTube videos are dense, and not all spoken words matter equally. I had to build a pipeline that identifies key points rather than just transcribing everything.

Keeping it fast – Nobody wants to wait minutes for a summary. I focused on making inference efficient, experimenting with different LLMs and summarization techniques to minimize response times.

Balancing detail and brevity – Some users want bullet points, others want a paragraph. I implemented multiple summary styles to adapt to different needs.

Would love to hear what you think! What features would make this more useful for you? Let me know, and feel free to try it out here: www.vid2sum.com
*People who are caught
There are asynchronous multiplayer games like Super Auto Pets, where you build a "team" of some sort and pit it against ghost teams of other players who played recently. Though I can't imagine how that would work for Minesweeper.
What, if any, practical implications does this have? Why would a real person or company want to specify a non real person as an author?
Why are topics of image generator AI always so chock full of '0x3F', confusion, rage, and hatred, often attributed to hand-wavy strawman "luddites"?

As if, I mean I'm suspecting that, exposure to generative image output is triggering model collapse even for us humans?
You can work from a local library.

Do you have anyone you can lean on? Cousin? Uncle? Anyone? Just a little financial support could go a long way.

Do you have any programming experience? Instead of making school a priority, I would try to get an actual job. Non-tech can be stupid simple, the pay can be decent, definitely better than Uber. Plus, you will have a space to work and a work machine.(this can be a bit hard right now as tech is going through a down cycle)

You need a job.

After you stabilize your situation you can think about AI/ML imo.
I’ve been using Podman on Fedora on Lima (Mac OS) with rootless containers based on Fedora rather than from Docker Hub for fullstack web dev. I’m ready to use Rocky Linux or RHEL for some production stuff if I find it more suitable for something and have used Rocky Linux a fair bit. I’ve really grown to like Fedora and have switched to it from Ubuntu. They have systems for building OCI images that are interesting and useful, and related to buildpacks. https://src.fedoraproject.org/container/s2i-base
If you want to know if this would be copyrightable, just flip a coin. I don't think anyone can give you better legal advice on this example than a coin toss.
> People’s phones got compromised by NSO sending images to them via whatsapp

Has this happened on iOS via WhatsApp?

I know Apple's had a view problems with this happening with iMessage, but always been unsure whether third party app sandbox does a good job of containing this?
RCS is supported per the standard. Google's implementation uses proprietary extensions. It's not the ivory tower you seem to think it is.
> For NIL to become a mainstream chipmaking technology, it must overcome several challenges. Defects are a big concern—tiny particles or imperfections on the mould can create repeating flaws across entire wafers. Alignment is another hurdle. Since chips are built in layers, the circuit patterns of every layer must line up precisely.

The one major advantage NIL has over optical techniques is that it does not require multiple patterning to address edge cases:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_patterning
Show HN: Cabos – Meeting Assistant for Non-Expert or Non-Native Speakers
Hi HN! I built a tool to help people like me stop missing important moments in meetings.

As a a startup founder and non-native English speaker, I often find myself in conversations with people from unfamiliar industries, cultures, or language backgrounds.

That’s when things get tough. I’ve occasionally missed key points and struggled to follow along in real time. This often leads to lower-quality conversations. And of course, I end up going back and forth through the recording just to catch up after the meeting.

I made Cabos to boost my own meeting quality. And, it’s already made a huge difference for me. We’re currently beta testing and would really appreciate your feedback! Thank you!