usef-

14 ms·

1. 271.▲
   by usef- 10mo ago

   It also didn't generate billions in income before even adding ads^1, nor grow anywhere near as quickly. ChatGPT is larger on most axes. YouTube was ambitious for its time. "In 2007, YouTube consumed as much bandwidth as the entire
2. 272.▲
   by usef- 10mo ago

   1. Yes, we're also talking about ChatGPT's free plan here too. Ads could fund more quota or bigger models for users who don't wish to pay (and/or just make it more sustainable) Google will almost certainly be doing this
3. 273.▲
   by usef- 10mo ago

   I'm not sure about it having the edge, I thought Google video had a worse interface between them at the time. But that point feels eerily relevant anyway: a lot of normal people I see don't care if Claude/Gemini/etc are
4. 274.▲
   by usef- 10mo ago

   I suspect some of the downvoters hate the idea of ads, which is understandable. But a lot of HN users use gmail, which has the same model. And there are plenty of paid email providers which seem far less popular (I use one). Ads didn't
5. 275.▲
   by usef- 10mo ago

   Youtube didn't either at the time. The front page was widely seen as garbage, and everyone I knew watched videos because they were embedded or linked from external sites. "If they introduced ads, people will just switch to other v
6. 276.▲
   by usef- 10mo ago

   People did say the same thing about Youtube, which was unprofitable and extremely expensive to run in the early years. I remember thinking everyone would leave once ads were added. At youtube's ad income rate (~$13/year), the curr
7. 277.▲
   by usef- 11mo ago

   Pure fact-based, niche questions like that aren't really the focus of most providers any more from what I've heard, since they can be solved more reliably by integrating search tools (and all providers now have search). I wouldn&#
8. 278.▲
   by usef- 11mo ago

   Do you think it's childish in the other direction too? They have been limiting many US products for similar reasons for many years now.
9. 279.▲
   by usef- 1y ago

   Yes, though money is still a big part of it. An Australian company (Lynas) developed the capability but was struggling to get investment largely because they couldn't produce them as cheaply as China's scale/subsidies/et
10. 280.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    The things you mention are sudden extremes: famine (extreme hunger), extreme temperature, being hit by a disease. The highest skin cancer group seems to be those that get sporadic extremes of sun (eg. the indoor office worker that burns on
11. 281.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    This isn't about GPU competition, it's about fab competition (which is in far more dire of a situation). Intel can no longer fund new process nodes by itself, and no customers want to take the business risk to build their product
12. 282.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    Seems fine to me. Maybe a regional blip? (you posted <1min ago)
13. 283.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    Have you tried borrowing a mildly popular recent book from the library? There's often a digital queue of 20+ people with reservations. There's plenty of incentive for most people to buy the real book rather than wait for the queue
14. 284.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    Yes, hit games are still popular enough for sequels (world of goo 2 came out 16 years after the first one, according to wikipedia, which is an unusually long time). I remember World of Goo being one of the few choices of games for iPad when
15. 285.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    Absolutely, I used one for many years before I was professional. Out of curiosity, what hardware are you picturing those people running it on? I've run Helix on a Daylight computer, which has a deliberately underpowered CPU (MediaTek H
16. 286.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    (replying to myself) Alpine package sizes: - helix 10.3MiB (+ 3 dependencies: musl, libgcc, sh) - emacs 14.5MiB (+ 1 dependency: musl) - neovim 18.7MiB (+ 9 dependencies musl, lua, tree-sitter, libint, libluv, unibilium, utf8proc, libuv, li
17. 287.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    Almost all the size is language grammars, which are optional and removable. Some distros like Alpine make them separate packages. But for desktop use, I think it's a good default to have everything "just work" out-of-the-box,
18. 288.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    Emacs binary download page pointed me to Windows, but for comparison: 141MB: emacs-30.1-nodeps.zip 75MB: emacs-30.1-installer.exe (better compression? Contents seem similar) 27MB helix-25.07-x86_64-windows.zip So there's still an Emacs
19. 289.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    I'm surprised none of them have built on Zed yet
20. 290.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    I think a lot of it is that tmux had friendler, sane defaults and clearer command design (eg. status bar out of the box). And, I suspect, people not already knowing screen. The latter reason is why Helix is slow in doing similar to vim, I t
21. 291.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    Is this related to the open source ollamac at all? https://github.com/kevinhermawan/Ollamac
22. 292.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    I was going to say the same thing. It was nice as their native save format could still be opened anywhere. But you did need to remember to export if you didn't want the extra fields increasing the file size. I remember finding firework
23. 293.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    This isn't about being AGI or not, and it's not "out of thin air". Modern implementations of LLMs can "do research" by performing searches (whose results are fed into the context), or in many code editors/
24. 294.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    Yes. I wonder if he was thinking of ASI, not AGI
25. 295.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    Which part of his article is specific to his use case? It all looks fairly general to me.
26. 296.▲
    by usef- 1y ago

    That's sad to see. > If you sense some ire here it’s because I went all-in on Deno. I was fooled. I was rugged pulled. I don't agree with the author's use of "rug pulled" here. Deno took a shot and not all busine
27. 297.▲
    by usef- 2y ago

    I was thinking that. Was FastCGI a child of a world where we had neither good library use ("import net/http"), nor (much) layering in front of the server (balancers / cdns / cloudflare etc). So it made sense to assu
28. 298.▲
    by usef- 2y ago

    That section is talking about risk — saying that they're now producing a lot more research around novel engines than the US. It's not saying that their own engines are ahead yet, just that risk is high given current progress. (a
29. 299.▲
    by usef- 2y ago

    It's already used a lot — the paper I believe is from 1991, and GPT4 among many others is MoE
30. 300.▲
    by usef- 2y ago

    In both endings it's saying that because compute becomes the bottleneck, and US has far more chips. Isn't it?