Ajedi32

30 ms·

331.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
And if they invest in new fabs and the bubble doesn't pop then they make a whole lot of that money they're in business to make. The incentives here are naturally very well aligned with solving the shortage. If doing nothing is l
332.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
If demand declines then the shortage is still solved regardless. If it doesn't decline, than anyone who took that risk and increased their production capacity will benefit greatly, and those who didn't will lose market share.
333.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Correct, but if they're right in that belief then it's still just a matter of time before demand goes down and the shortage is solved. If they're wrong and this is actually a permanent spike in demand, then it'll take th
334.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
The resources are certainly there; the high prices are providing them. It's just a matter of time.
335.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
And thereby leave a bunch of profits on the table while simultaneously losing market share to competitors who do invest in more capacity?
336.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
The RAM shortage is... a shortage. It's temporary by nature. RAM didn't suddenly get 4x more expensive to produce, it's just in high demand right now. Supply will eventually catch up even if it takes a few years.
337.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Sure, I won't dispute that warrantless mass surveillance of everyone at all times makes it easier to track down criminals. I just want to be clear that that's what we're talking about. These don't only target people wh
338.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
The commerce secretary has no control over what the Supreme Court does. Anyone could have read the law and decided whether they thought the tariffs were legal or not.
339.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
By tracking everyone at all times.
340.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Could be wrong but I don't think Flock makes speed trap or red light cameras. These are license plate readers that conduct constant surveillance of everyone at all times, whether or not you've broken any traffic laws.
341.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Are they Flock cameras or bog standard CCTV?
342.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Good to see this called out. The HN echo chamber has this really terrible habit of attributing any disagreement with the prevailing opinion here to big, shadowy forces with evil motives (billionaires, corporations, three letter agencies, po
343.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
At that point it's on the parents. We can't stop parents from giving their kids alcohol or drugs either. (Not saying internet access is necessarily on the same level as that but you get the point.)
344.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Not necessarily saying what they did was right, but I think there's a strong utilitarian argument to be made that what they did in that case was, in fact, the best way to keep children safe. What's more dangerous? CSAM on the inte
345.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
> AI came along which made it pointless What? What does AI have to do with anything here?
346.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Right, my understanding is that the whole point of "device integrity" is for a device manufacturer that your bank trusts to be able to vouch that your device is "secure". If the device is under your control rather than t
347.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Yeah it's not that the people involved have no ideals, it's that the company structure as a whole doesn't, and over time that structure will eventually outlive, corrupt, and/or overpower the ideals of the founders or oth
348.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
The equivalence is that in all three cases those are the official duties of the office. I would agree that the scope of the president's job description has gotten overly broad over the last century as congress has delegated more and mo
349.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
This doesn't say the executive is above the law, it says you can't prosecute the president for doing his job, just like you can't prosecute judges for their rulings on the bench or members of congress for their votes on the f
350.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Though actually... I've recently become more sympathetic to the idea that software developers should be forced to take active steps to make software they distribute easy for users to modify, because software is both essential to mode
351.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
I don't necessarily think they should have to design anything to make it easier, just not actively design things to make it harder.
352.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
I don't think Waymo is using Street View / satellite data to drive. They have to build an HD map using a special LIDAR-equipped vehicle before deploying in a new area. Maybe their navigation system will be better than the competit
353.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
The bitter lesson I think is a great way of explaining the logic behind Tesla's strategy. People aren't getting it. Whether or not it'll actually work remains to be seen, but it's a perfectly reasonable strategy. One cou
354.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
> demanding someone make their software exactly how you desire IMO the way this should work is that Google can make their software however they want provided they don't do anything to stop me from changing it to work the way I wan
355.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
> The plaintiffs argue and the Court concludes that the President lacks authority under IEEPA to impose tariffs. I disagree. In accord with Judge Taranto’s careful and persuasive opinion in the Federal Circuit, I would conclude that the
356.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
They didn't rule it unconstitutional - it's not. They ruled that the specific statute Trump was using that allows him to "regulate imports" doesn't include regulating imports with tariffs.
357.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Read the opinions. Both are pretty reasonable. I think the dissent has a good point that a plain language interpretation of the term "regulate imports" would seem to include tariffs. The bigger issue I think is that that statute e
358.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
I think the root of the problem is our two party system and the polarization of our culture. Congress and the president often act as a single partisan unit, not a collection of independent thinkers with their own ideas about how the country
359.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
Fully agree, but that's what happens when you keep piling laws on top of laws on top of laws and never go back and refactor. If I recall correctly, the case hinged on some vague wording in a semi-obscure law passed back in 1977.
360.
by Ajedi32 8mo ago
So you're saying if a teacher decides to use a book in class that's wholly inappropriate for the age group they're teaching we should ban the teacher, not the book? I suppose that makes sense. But if the book in question is s

More ›