Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
827a
searching PlanetScale…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
31 ms
·
451.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
Only a sentence later do I explicitly reference Github Copilot; yet they belong on the list because despite having every advantage a company could have, the resources of a megacorporation, all the source code in the world, the semi-independ
452.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
Yeah to be clear, I think Google is the strongest in AI product development of the FAANG companies. I included them in the list because the most complaints I see about AI product integration among FANNG comes from Google products; the inc
453.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
I think there's a lot of really interesting (and profitable) AI products out there. And: there's so many more that can be built. We're only scratching the surface of what the industry has already invented can do. Not in an &q
454.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
I tend to feel that a lack of government intervention isn't a significant piece of this puzzle. When Standard Oil held a monopoly on the oil world, it was mostly possible because they were monopolizing a discrete set of natural resourc
455.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
My deepest concern at this time isn't that AI eventually gets written down to nothing; because I don't think it will. Its that these companies are so scared of being out-competed by an AI-first competitor that they're willing
456.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
Its a nice productivity and capability boost that feels on the same magnitude as, for example, React. The "dream" of it being able to just take tickets and agentically get a PR up for review is possible for ~5% of tickets. That go
457.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
I think that's an extreme characterization. Existing AIs are intelligent enough to be able to form immediately executable API requests based on the content of an OpenAPI schema. OpenAPI defines everything they need; endpoint names, hum
458.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
I really don't know where you're coming from with that statement. 1. No one asserted that MCP's key innovation was its format. In fact, what I strongly, almost explicitly implied with my previous comment is that MCP has made
459.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
I agree, the article does explicitly say that; the thesis of the article and the information it presents to support that thesis are entirely at odds. That's what I'd argue this is a poor article, just an advertisement for the worl
460.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
> MCP thinks it's for giving context to AI models. But really? It's just a really good protocol for making things talk to other things. MCP has very little utility outside of LLMs. The article begins by saying "but what if
461.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
Those are just rice contests. I'd imagine the majority of them took it as a challenge to win the contest rather than use it as their daily driver.
462.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
You can feel that if you want, but the data is clear: 73% of Americans are overweight. Its not easy to lose weight. Managing caloric intake is hard. Eating the right things is hard. Activity is hard. Suggesting that structured systems, back
463.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
Sure, but no one can actually do that accurately, for the aforementioned reasons. "I'm gaining weight; I should eat less": How do you structure that in a way that's actually actionable and drive results? Just a general s
464.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
How are you measuring energy out, such that it can directly influence decisions on how much energy you should be deciding to take in? I promise you: Your methodology is inaccurate.
465.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
Calories in / Calories out might be broadly accurate, but reality is a lot more complicated than that. People are really bad at tracking how many calories they take in. Its impossible to measure how many calories you're actually e
466.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
I agree that there is no reason to believe the current administration has any priority in fixing the situation, and its definitely reasonable to state that they're operating in bad faith, and that we have much bigger problems than this
467.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
The Trump administration has actually passed an order to limit this to 15% of the grant value. But, the point stands. [1] https://www.nsf.gov/policies/document/indirect-cost-rate
468.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
The biggest reason is because we have a strategic multinational interest in remaining a leader in science. China (and other countries) will fund science. We have to as well, or we fall behind. Its national security. We also have a strategic
469.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
I have a suspicion that while the major AI companies have been pretty samey and competing in the same space for a while now, the market is going to force them to differentiate a bit, and we're going to see OpenAI begin to lose the race
470.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
I've flipped my stance on this. I used to be pretty pro passkey, but after using them for a while what I've observed is: 1. There's very low consistency in implementation, so while I understand the problems passkeys solve, it
471.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
Something significant changed about the spellchecking and swipe to type algorithms. Significant performance degradation, especially in those "i just need to get a quick message out while walking" situations. Hopefully we see some
472.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
If its the difference-maker for you: Google Messages has a web experience, and in my not-recent experience it works great. The iOS 26 keyboard (public beta) is the biggest regression I've ever seen Apple make, and they're a compan
473.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
There are 2.2 million federal workers. If you can't think of anywhere that tools like this could improve productivity, it speaks more to your lack of imagination or lack of understanding of what federal workers do than anything intrins
474.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
Of course, the big difference between The Feed and Bread & Circuses is: The feed is weaponized to be the perfect entertainment mechanism, which is well-indicated by how many hours a day the typical person spends scrolling it versus the
475.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
One can always enjoy more money; that's a far cry from feeling that life is so miserable that storming the streets seems logical.
476.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
The issue with this theory post-internet economy is: its only true if that money is spent chasing a limited amount of scarce goods and services. But the majority of the US economy today is spent on goods and services that are no longer scar
477.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
So, to give a tactile example that helped me recently: We have a frontend web application that was having some issues with a specific feature. This feature makes a complex chain of a maybe dozen API requests when a resource is created, cond
478.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
I honestly disagree (mostly). Sure, we might see some adjustments to valuations to better account for the expected profit margins; those might have been overblown. But if you had access to any dashboard inside these companies ([1]) all you&
479.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
We're also at the apex of almost every way you can measure human wellbeing. Health outcomes, literacy, child mortality, food availability, clean water, working hours [1], none have been better than they are right now. To suggest techno
480.
▲
by
827a
1y ago
Yes he did so: Poorly. His idea [0] to use Juno is a pretty bad one, given that it doesn't have the fuel to do what he suggests, and even if it did, one of its engines was damaged during a recent maneuver. And, at least according to Ja
More ›