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

No, you don't. Not only there are many examples of detailed stackoverflow articles written by absolute experts, you also need answer often for something trivial(which is like half of my chatgpt), e.g. how to export in pgadmin, or a nondescriptive error in linux.


> No, you don't.

When someone says "I feel like" and you answer "No, you don't", you're most certainly wrong :-).

I do feel like the parent.


If you read parent's comment it's not "I feel like" comment even though he mentioned it. I have been in software engineering for long and the queries to stackoverflow/chatgpt combined haven't decreased for me.


> I don't know what your experience has been, but I do feel

Are you being serious here?


It doesn't create infinite loop in brainfuck, but looped itself.


Examples? If you are going to say something like linux, almost every developer gets paid to contribute to linux(I remember 95% commits have company attribution). Same with postgres etc.


They are paid, but the end used doesn't pay.


End user are corporate linux users and they pay for maintenance? Perhaps you mean all the end users doesn't pay.


They don't pay to the full group of Linux devs, they pay to companies like redhat, which does not represent the Linux kernel dev community.


> Wikipedia seems to do just fine without.

No, they still pay fair wage, and I would trust it more if it pays fair wage to people spending their time on the project(including the creator).


They pay fair wages because they have enough scale where pestering for donations once a year is enough to justify their costs and then some. And even then, this forum is very famous for shitting on such a large scale not-for-profits, with many justifying their decision not to donate by seeing how much money the non-profit already has in their pockets. The only reason we even know how much money the non-profit has in its pockets is because non-profits are legally obliged to publicly disclose that, while for-profits are not (until they go public of course).

My point being that it's a mountain to climb, and just because those at the top have already climbed it doesn't translate into everyone being able to climb it. It takes a whole lot of effort and probably some public grants, but getting those public grants is a whole different skill set than actually building the thing. And you can only get a public grant after you've already created something useful, so your idea of a non-profit quickly turns into an inescable hole in your pocket that you're desperately trying to fill for at least a year or two.

This is why while our lists might vary, every single one of us can only name like 5, maybe 10 non-profits that have "made it" (however we define that success).

All that said, go set up a reocurring $2/month donation to your favourite non-profit right now. Whether you choose Wikimedia or something else, I'm sure it's well worth 10% of a monthly subscription you're already paying for an LLM or whatever. Unlike your for-profit subscriptions, if the money becomes tight you can always cancel these without losing anything.


Wages and profits are conceptually different sorts of things, even if it's sometimes hard to draw a bright line in specific cases.


If it was not clear till now I am talking about wage or wage level earning for the creator.


No just stop being cynical. The reason almost every electronic item is cheaper now than 2 decades back is just becuase the demand(and thus supply) is higher.


I can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. I'd argue it's more the result of the CCP bankrolling the Chinese electronics industry to the point where roughly 70% of all electronics goods are produced in China. The concentration of expertise and supply chains is staggering, and, imo, was really born out of geopolitical strategy.


No, its not. Transistors used to cost $1. Now they cost $1/billion or something. It's all because the 10s of billions of fixed cost incurred by fab is shared among customers. If we create less chips, the fixed cost wont reduce.


> of the CCP bankrolling the Chinese electronics industry to the point where roughly 70% of all electronics goods are produced in China.

But we don't see this bankrolling in absolute values. Rather, it's due to regressive taxation, low (cheap) social security for workers, and very weak intellectual property protection.


Yeah for some reason AI energy use is so overreported. Using chatgpt for query does not even use two order of magnitude less energy compared to toasting a bread. And you can eat bread untoasted too if you care about energy use.

[1]: https://epoch.ai/gradient-updates/how-much-energy-does-chatg...


How many slices of toast are you making a day?

If you fly a plane a millimeter, you're using less energy than making a slice of toast; would you also say that it's accurate that all global plane travel is more efficient than making toast?


1-2 slice a day and 1-50 chatgpt query per day. For me it would be within same order of magnitude, and I don't really care about both as both of them are dwarfed by my heater or aircon usage.


From my estimation each second of gpt eats about 0.5-1.5 watthours


You can say it takes 1800-5400 W. Not sure where you are estimating it from.


Depending on what you're doing its taking up to 8GPUs working in parallel to serve those queries.


Yes but then the batch size is in 100s or even 1000s. These GPU doesn't serve just 1 user at a time.


EU doesn't fine relative to EU profits, it fines relative to global revenue.


You confidently state that EU fines relative to global revenue, but you are wrong.

The case linked above is an Italian competition authority, so I'm any case, no EU level calculation.

There are various legal bases applicable at EU level (competition, GDPR, ...) so depending on the case which rules are applied varies. But in general these guidelines apply, which explicitly state the basis as follows:

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...

> In determining the basic amount of the fine to be imposed, the Commission will take the value of the undertaking's sales of goods or services to which the infringement directly or indirectly relates in the relevant geographic area within the EEA. It will normally take the sales made by the undertaking during the last full business year of its participation in the infringement (hereafter ‘value of sales’).

E.g. most recent EU cases as per their press website note that they applied these guidelines:

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_... https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_...


> most


No its not. It would be waste only if the there is a high temperature gradient, which is minimized in mining operation through proper cooling.

It's that computation requires electricity. And almost all of the heat in bitcoin mining comes from computation, technically changing transistor state.


GPS could be blocked easily, and AFAIK even given corrupted inputs. And HFT could possibly benefit from blocking or corrupting competitors GPS.


Deploying a GPS jammer in civilized territory is a great way to go to prison.


Would it actually go so far?

Would the police actually try to investigate from where came the jammer? Might the competing firm possibly even finance an investigation themselves privately? And if so, would the police then accept the evidence?

People have done far more evil things for money.


The victim firm would definitely notice, they’d tell the FCC, and their investigators will show up with a device that literally points them to wherever the jammer is. If you do this for stupid, silly reasons you will get fined[1], if you do it in commission of another crime you will probably get made an example of. It doesn’t matter how evil you are, it’s hilariously easy to get caught doing this.

[1]: https://www.nj.com/news/2013/08/man_fined_32000_for_blocking...


> “Mr. Bojczak claimed that he installed and operated the jamming device in his company-supplied vehicle to block the GPS … system that his employer installed in the vehicle,” the FCC decision stated.

I'm not surprised that somebody would try and do this. However it is just so stupid at every level.


Next to Newark Airport too. He’s lucky they didn’t throw the book at him - they could’ve hit him for reckless endangerment.


We are talking about the UK, not the US. And the jammer will most likely be tucked away in some closet with no hint as to how it got there.


Where were we talking about the UK? All anyone said in this message chain was HFT (and NIST).


Sorry, you are correct. As soon as the subject of HFT came up I was thinking about London and the things they do to reduce latency to the exchanges in North America. It's too late to edit or remove my previous message.


It's not like foreign adversaries care.


The parent was saying HFT firms would do this to other HFT firms. They would care about doing this kind of thing - it’s not a white collar crime. And foreign adversaries would care about doing this during peacetime, especially for very unclear benefit.


Meta added it in "<meta>" tag(no pun intended) intended for search engine. And some other app crawled it and displayed it in main text. Not defending Meta but the text is not visible in instagram or any other Meta app.


It’s the OpenGraph description metadata (“og:description”, see https://ogp.me/ )

Many apps, like Slack and LinkedIn, use it to display a link card with a description.


og:description is exactly the meta tag to use for link descriptions in embeds. Not all meta tags are only for search engines. The app acted correctly here.


If og:description is used in the app, the app shouldn't just show append it to main text without any way to differentiate.


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

Search: