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


> I think people need to be treated like people and not some resource to be exploited.

Meta's business model is to treat people as a resource to be exploited. It's fundamentally how the business works.

Meta regards its users as cattle, as livestock. It's why Zuckerberg thinks Facebook users are "dumb fucks":

https://www.businessinsider.com/well-these-new-zuckerberg-im...


Microsoft and Windows were never the enemy.

To quote Linus Torvalds from 1997: "I don't try to be a threat to Microsoft, mainly because I don't really see MS as competition. Especially not Windows - the goals of Linux and Windows are simply so different."


He got less humble later on when momentum started building behind Linux. To quote Linus Torvalds from 2003: “Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect.

I mean, this whole thread is basically suggesting that 23 years later, improvements to Linux and self-sabotage by Microsoft are going to possibly destroy (or atleast, start to cause some bleeding) to Microsoft (in the gaming-market).

This isn't Linux looking to destroy MS, this is mostly Valve understanding the requirement for an OS that won't be able to become predatory to them and their business model in a single system update.


Personally I used to be a Linux zealot back in the early 2000s, then I actually learned to program C++ and dove a bit into OS architecture... I realized why Linux on the desktop always sucked.. Not because of some dastardly conspiracy by Microsoft, but because of the very basic fact that server people and vendors held the developer purse strings and they drove the engineering decisions.

Let's take a simple example.. to send a network packet to a different machine, you just call into the Linux kernel, which dispatches your stuff directly to the network card, and you're done. Pretty simple. However if you want to send a message to your neighboring X11 window, you have to go into the kernel to do IPC, which then somehow dispatches your message to the server process, unblocks and schedules the message pump in X11, which finds your window, then once again you go back into the kernel... then your target process is scheduled, so on and so forth.

Wildly inefficient, yet Linux never got proper good IPC merged (until binder), low latency audio sucked, and none of this coordination logic or audio processing got in the kernel.

Why? Because servers don't need that stuff and some server engineer isn't going to know or care about your use case, you're just small fry, and none of the stuff you do is worth taking on technical risk or slowing down server workloads.


The goal was to be able to patch and fix the systems I was using, and swap out bits and pieces as I wanted. And that seems to be less and less possible on Linux these days, as you have these tightly vertically-integrated stacks where everything depends on the latest version of everything else.

We are so far removed from 1997 that this statement means nothing.

> the goals of Linux and Windows are simply so different.

So different that Windows muscle memory works on most main stream Linux UI's, Many (most?) Steam games run on Linux, and now we have Windows in the Linux kernel.


Rather, several missing, useful APIs that were hard to emulate efficiently have been added. That's not "Windows in the Linux kernel".

> several missing, useful APIs

Windows API's.

> That's not "Windows in the Linux kernel".

How is that not?


Does Windows muscle memory work? The vast majority of shortcuts are completely different for the casual user, and for the power user, there's no regedit or control panel and other such things.

> there's no regedit or control panel and other such things

That's not a bug, it's a feature.


Be that as it may, it means that the muscle memory (or more accurately, the mental model of the system) is gone. I've long held the belief that power users or knows-enough-to-be-dangerous users have a harder time switching for that exact reason.

A control panel (or cross-distro YaST) would be very welcome in the ecosystem I think.


> muscle memory (or more accurately, the mental model of the system)

That's not "more accurately", that's just a completely different thing. When I'm on Mac, my muscle memory is thrown off. I'll be typing and my ctrl+s, alt+tab, win+4, ctrl+left* all cause wildly unpredictable (to me) things. I'm currently using Linux, and all of those things work how I expect (with a tiny asterisk on win+#). When I want a control panel, I press the windows button on my keyboard to open something functionally equivalent to the start menu, and open System Settings to get something functionally equivalent to the control panel.

I have no doubt that I could learn the deep differences between Windows and Mac over time, but the initial muscle memory causes me stress before I get to that point. When I switch to Linux I don't have that stress, and so I've been comfortably learning those differences.

* - save, switch to the previously in-focus window, switch to the 4th program on the taskbar, move the cursor one word to the left


We weren't talking about whether the registry was better or worse, we were talking about how similar the two OSes were.

... in case of the registry, you were also talking about replacing a unix philosophy system (each application has its own standalone config file) with a windows like monolith (everything goes into the registry).

Tbh it's not even muscle memory, how often do you edit config files?


Alt-Tab to cycle windows.

How do we "have Windows in the Linux kernel"?

Um... Are you referring to WSL? Wouldn't that be the linux kernel running under windows?

WSL 1.0 was doing something like that. Doing syscall translation in real time. Eventually edge cases forced them to abandon that architecture and now it's just a VM.

Was it edge cases? I thought the main driver for WSL2 was better filesystem performance.

> multiple grownup movies opening widely at the same time (“Demolition Man,”

I've never heard Demolition Man described as a grownup movie before.

If a movie is well made then it is as long or as short as it needs to be. If it isn't then it's not.


> Full compared to what?

Tesla set their own benchmark, their own goal posts, and their own timelines.

In 2016 Tesla said, "as of today, all Tesla vehicles produced in our factory – including Model 3 – will have the hardware needed for full self-driving capability at a safety level substantially greater than that of a human driver.":

https://electrek.co/2024/08/24/tesla-deletes-its-blog-post-s...

https://web.archive.org/web/20240730071548/https://tesla.com...

That was, of course, a lie. Tesla has spent the last 10 years lying about the state of FSD. Tesla keeps claiming FSD will be achieved "next year".

What about 1 million robotaxis on the road by 2020: https://www.thedrive.com/news/38129/elon-musk-promised-1-mil...

More lies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_autono...

But you knew all that already. Defending a decade's worth of lies is intellectually dishonest.


Some advice if you want to be intellectually satiated, I would suggest disregarding any forward-looking statements by any company executives. You'll find life to be a lot less emotionally draining.

You can change the subject to the hyperbole and spin by Elon Musk, that's fine. Just be aware that's what you're doing. You're changing the subject. I do understand this cult of anti-personality, but I'm only interested in the technology (made by thousands of people whose name is not Elon) in customer hands right now and not about past promises. Right now, their FSD technology stack looks fairly impressive.


The subject hasn't changed. The subject is Tesla's full self-driving is not, in fact, full self-driving.

It wasn't 10 years ago and it still isn't now.

If you are unable to admit to the practical reality of that then you are not interested in technology.


You changed the subject. If you cannot see this, perhaps ask an LLM to explain it to you.

As for the actual subject, your opinion on the semantic question is noted. I did ask, I suppose.


The moment you said "Full is a relative term. Full compared to what?" is the moment you started playing dishonest semantic games.

I recognize you're desperate to "win", but there's no winning once you embrace dishonesty.


Dude, nobody else is here. You need convince me that I did anything other than ask a reasonable semantic question. Trying to dissemble in front of a non-existent crowd isn't effective. Want to change my mind? Make an actual argument.

Now. How was I being dishonest? Be specific.


The AV1 decoder is dav1d. The AV2 decoder is dav2d.

One day in the mysterious future the AV3 decoder will be dav3d.



You're right!


The range estimates use different test procedures. BMW's quoted range uses the WLTP test procedure. China's CLTC test procedure is much more generous.

As noted in the article:

> "The Seal 08’s claimed 1,000+ km CLTC range translates to roughly 620+ miles — though real-world figures under EPA or WLTP testing would be lower. For reference, the recently updated Mercedes-Benz EQS 450+ claims 926 km under WLTP (575 miles) with its new 800V architecture and 118 kWh battery."

To compare the range properly you need to do a real world test of the vehicles on the same circuit in the same conditions.


People are lazy. AI will replace thinking for many people. Augmentation always leads to atrophy.


> Augmentation always leads to atrophy.

That's a very bold claim. As a small example let's look at calculators - I remember a lot of claims that having access to calculators would make people's brains atrophy and they'll never be able to do actual math, but what I'm seeing in myself and most people around me is that we're using calculators (and more mathematical software) to tackle significantly more complex problems than people would be able to do if they rejected calculators.

To be clear, I'm not arguing that kids should be using a calculator from the first day of pre-school, but I do absolutely think that using them as later on as augmentation is clearly beneficial.


Writing atrophied our memory, calculators atrohpied our mental arithmetic, GPS nagivation atrophied our navigation ability, LLMs are atrophying our ability to program.

When you externalise part of your brain in a new tool, like a calculator, that part of your brain is no longer needed and atrophies.


If the complexity of your mathematical problems was down to arithmetic then your problems were not at all complex.


A small example is doing NPV (Net Present Value) calculations to compare the benefits from alternative projects/investments. It's just basic arithmetic, but is annoying to do by hand. I'm sure that if we had to do them with just pen and paper, we would do significantly fewer of them, and with a lot less detailed scenarios than we can with tools.


a lot of people indeed cannot do even simple calculations by themselves. Your example just adds to the point.


"A lot of people" never could do simple calculations, regardless of calculators. But if you're interested in actual figures over time, this data from nationsreportcard.gov would probably be the best longitudinal data source we have about the US, showing a strong general increase in mathematical scores, both for 9 and 13 year-olds, from when calculators started being introduced in the 70s and until the 2010s. Note that there's a recent decline over the last decade, partially explained by the pandemic, but even with it, current scores are higher than what they were in the 70s.

https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/ltt/mathematics/scores-per...

https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/ltt/mathematics/scores-per...


> It most definitely is as well.

No. uBlock Origin works best in Firefox: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...

uBlock Origin Lite can't do everything uBlock Origin does: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-as...

If Lite is working for you then good. If you want fuller capability then you want uBlock Origin in Firefox.


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

Search: