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

The lack of GenAI integration is actually refreshing

Photoshops recent AI rotate tool looks useful compared to these features GIMP is adding.

Do you suggest using manual brushes instead of content-aware fill, or am I supposed to not want to retouch the images in the way that GenAI makes so quickly and easily? My argument is that applications probably should provide useful tools for solving practical problems, regardless of their implementation details.

Content-aware fill has been in PS since 2010 I believe, long before the genAI craze.

There are other applications with that implemented, with GenAI too.

RuneScape millionaires?


There were dozens of ways to make money off of RuneScape back in the day. Selling bot scripts, running bot farms (this is still very lucrative to this day), running gambling rings, bulk buying gold and reselling, the list goes on.

The ecosystem was incredible and it was basically a crash course in Anarcho-capitalism, I'm pretty immune to any kind of scam because of having been in that environment.

I made close to 20 grand as a 16 year old through some bug abuse, over the course of 2 weeks if I recall. But alas, I blew it pretty quickly because easy come, easy go.


I probably lack imagination, but how would gambling work in this game?


The whole game is basically one giant random number generator, so there was a lot to gamble on.

E.g., two players put one million gold pieces in their inventory, equip no equipment (so no attack bonuses), every hit on each other is now an RNG roll with identical odds for each player. Battle to the death and voila.

That one's quite basic but there were more elaborate games such as flower poker. The game had a flower seeds item which when planted would spawn a flower on the floor. The flower would be of a random color (e.g. red, blue, white, ...). People would bet on which color flower would pop up, or plant plant five flowers sequentially and try and get something akin to a poker hand (e.g. three of a kind, full house).

Quite silly, in retrospect, as I'm typing this out.


Quite imaginative, too... thanks for answering :)


RuneScape private servers used to bring in tons of money. I helped manage one when I was in my early teens, and I can confirm the owner (who was only a few years older than I) was bringing in mid six-figures annually.

Then of course there was the rampant gambling. The founders of online casino Stake and streaming platform Kick both started their “careers” in RuneScape gambling. IIRC they invented “staking” which was a method of gambling gold against other players, before they were banned. But the gambling economy in RuneScape used to IRL mint millionaires for sure.


Staking was a built in feature of RuneScape in the duel arena before it was removed. They did not "invent" it themselves.


They did run a dicing clan as well, FWIW, although I doubt they were the first to do it.


I had swim teammates who made at least hundreds of thousands minting and selling autominers on eBay. I assume if I knew a couple who did that well some made millions.


I do the same thing, but with a Markdown file which I add a section to every day in a roughly append-only fashion


What jurisdiction does a data center in space fall under, anyway? The one of the nation that launched it?


A lot of it is being done by mercenaries brought in from Afghanistan and Iraq


How do you know? Do you have links for that information? And if true they’d be regular murders brought in, not mercenaries.


In the article it says

“ While most of the killings were carried out by IRGC and Basij forces, reports received by Iran International indicate that proxy forces from Iraq and Syria were also used in the crackdown. The deployment of non-local forces suggests a decision to expand repression capacity as quickly as possible.”


Mercenaries are murderers for hire.

Also, read the article. :)


I think the point is that its believed they were foreigners who were part of iranian proxy forces (e.g. iranian backed militias in iraq), so weren't doing it for money but out of some sort of loyalty to the iranian regime or ideology.

Usually mercenaries mean people doing it for money not ideology who get paid significantly more than your average soldier.


What's wrong with VLC?


Making such a bold, unsubstantiated claim is a curious item in an otherwise detailed document. I went looking for other explanations and found this gem: https://www.reddit.com/r/mpv/comments/m1sxjo/it_is_better_mp...

I think it might be one of those classic “everyone should just get good like me” style opinions you find polluting some subject matter communities.


Yes, absolutely. The top answer on that Reddit link starts with: "MPV is the ultimate video player on planet earth, all the others are junk in comparison" and doesn't mention VLC at all. That's not a helpful answer, it's just signalling that they're a huge fan of MPV, with nothing to suggest they've ever even tried anything else.


In the olden times of not working/playing movies (00's) and being a clueless tech support for ppl even more clueless about them computers,

The vlc was how you could get any movie to work (instead of messing with all these codecs, which apparently, in lieu to another comment in this thread, aren't really codecs).


my biggest pet peeve was that VLC was always considered a streamer and treated local files as streams as well. for the longest time, stepping within the video was not possible. reverse play was also a bane as well, even with i-frame only content. i have long found players that are better for me, but still find myself using VLC frequently because it still has features these other players do not.


This matches with my observation, VLC tends to be more tolerant of slightly broken files or random issues that you encounter when streaming. Especially for hls streams, vlc often works when ffplay refuses to play it, I believe because vlc uses their own demuxer (instead of relying on libavformat).


Lmao this will not work


You're absolutely right!


Ehhh just calling a raw LLM is not going to replace anyone and be prone to hallucination, sure. But lawyers are increasingly using LLM systems, and there's law-specific products that are heavily grounded (ie. they can only respond from source material).


I don't know if that's so much a mistake as it is ambiguity though? To me, using the viewer's perspective in this case seems totally reasonable.

Does it still use the viewer's perspective if the prompt specifies "Put a strawberry in the _patient's left eye_"? If it does, then you're onto something. Otherwise I completely disagree with this.


“Eye on the left” is different from “the left eye”. First can be ambiguous, second really isn’t.


I think "the left eye" in this particular case (a photo of a skull made of pancake batter) is still very slightly ambiguous. "The skull's left eye" would not be.


Interesting, because I would say the opposite. "On the left" suggests left of image, "the left eye" could be any version of left.


I guess there's some ambiguity regarding whether or not this can be ambiguous. Because it seems like it can to me.


“The right socket” can only be implied one way when talking about a body just like you only have one right hand despite the fact that it is on my left when looking at you.


I think the fact that anyone in this thread thinks it's ambiguous is proof by definition that it's ambiguous.


"Plug into right power socket"

Same language, opposite meaning because of a particular noun + context.

I think the only thing obvious here is that there is no obvious solution other than adding lots of clarification to your prompt.


I think you missed the entire point?


No, they just disagree with you.


How do you disagree with having a right and a left hand?


GP is using right as in “correct”, not directionality.


No, I don't think they are.

If you are facing a wall-plate with two power sockets on it side by side and you are telling someone to plug something in, which one would be "the right socket", and which would be "the left socket"?

If above the wall-plate is a photo of a person and you are someone to draw a tattoo on the photo, which is "the right arm" and which is "the left arm"?

Same wording, different expectation.


Power plugs are not people.

ETA: and if I were telling someone which socket to plug something into, it would absolutely be from the prospective of the person doing the plugging, not from inside the wall.


Neither are sculptures of skulls made of pancake batter.


> Power plugs are not people.

Agreed. So the "obvious" meaning of left and right differ depend on context, which is what pphysch was pointing out.


"Right hand" is practically a bigram that has more meaning, since handedness is such a common topic.

Also context matters, if you're talking to someone you would say "right shoulder" for _their_ right since you know it's an observer with different vantage point. Talking about a scene in a photo "the right shoulder" to me would more often mean right portion of the photo even if it was the person's left shoulder.


Having one person in the frame isn't enough to unambiguously put us into the "talking about a body" context.


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

Search: