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

> That’s a fallacy.

> Nothing is saved overall.

This might be the most ridiculous POV of the second-hand market I’ve ever read.

There’s definitely some people who are buying new phones purely because they are ok with eating the difference between the new phone’s cost price and the old one’s sale price. I’m certain that’s a tiny niche of the entire market. And there’s the even smaller niche that actually use their phone till its very last breath. On the other hand, there’s an immeasurably larger part of the new phone market, formed of people who just buy a new phone anyways when they feel like it and leave the old one in their drawer.

Source: User surveys and research I conducted in another life


Well, if we’re comparing all jobs to all other jobs - then you may have a valid point. Otherwise, we should probably focus on comparing complexity and supply/demand for the skills and output being spoken about.

Don’t you understand? That’s why all these AI companies are praying for humanoid robots to /just work/ - so we can replace humans mentally and physically ASAP!

I'm sure those will help. But that doesn't solve the problem the parent stated. Those robots can't solve those real world problems until they can reason, till they can hypothesize, till they can experiment, till they can abstract all on their own. The problem is you can't replace the humans (unilaterally) until you can create AGI. But that has problem of its own, as you now have to contend with previously creating a slave class of artificial life forms.

I completely agree - my comment was sarcastic and in jest.

My bad. Getting hard to tell these days lol

No worries - you’ve added useful context for those who may be misguided by these greedy corporations looking to replace us all. Maybe it helps them reconsider their point of view!

> no programming language supports the notion of "just do the usual" or "I don't care, pick whatever, we can revisit the topic once the choice matters"

Programming languages already take lots of decisions implicitly and explicitly on one’s behalf. But there are way more details of course, which are then handled by frameworks, libraries, etc. Surely at some point, one has to take a decision? Your underlying point is about avoiding boilerplate, and LLMs definitely help with that already - to a larger extent than cookie cutter repos, but none of them can solve IRL details that are found through rigorous understanding of the problem and exploration via user interviews, business challenges, etc.


So your implication that other sources of energy currently do not need scaling coordination somehow? I fail to see how that is true, maybe you can provide some insights?

Wind and solar are not in ur control. I can turn on a generator and get power. Some plants might need weeks to start up - but this is in my control. I have no idea how windy it will be in five days.

It's easier to coordinate N electricity suppliers when N is small.

My point is that scaling coordination issues exist for everything, including all sources of energy production.

Singling out solar and continuing to not prioritize it will inevitably lead to ongoing grid issues. Whereas this has been mostly solved for other sources, due to lobbying and legacy. Thus my confusion about the OPs half-baked point.


If you go up the thread, this is the context we're in:

"Solar can be deployed by hundreds of thousands of individual efforts and financing at the same time, with almost no bureaucracy."

N>100000 is a lot harder to coordinate than the ~15,000 established power plants, which have come online over the last hundred or so years.


I’m struggling to understand why the German government is looking to compromise archlinux - arguably a niche of niches that is unlikely to be used by any of their enemies/targets.


I’m not familiar with the UK, but is the tax on alcohol at pubs higher than at a store? My general understanding was that people have just shopped visiting pubs for other reasons - like diluted drinks, crappy food, loud music, etc.

People stop visiting crappy pubs if they have diluted drinks (quite rare, UK is very strict about being served exact alcohol measures, there is very little free pouring in the UK and many people would spot other drinks being diluted), crappy food (sadly all too common), loud music (age related), etc.

But not many pubs are crappy in these respects.

The main reasons why fewer people are visiting average or good pubs are: * cost of living is going up so many people have less disposable income * the younger generations are much less interested in alcohol than previous generations

The latter point is an interesting one. There are two wildly different drivers for this that I’ve witnessed.

Many of the under 25s now either don’t drink alcohol at all, or only drink a fraction of what their elders did. Many prefer to just go to the gym instead (which is the millenials third space).

On the flip side, some of the children of my friends and family say that alcohol in pubs is just too expensive, so they get their kicks from recreational drugs like weed or ket.

The number of people who have the disposable income to go to the pub regularly is falling in the UK, and the mainstay of the pub was often the working class and they are being priced out by everything getting more expensive.

There aren’t enough people with enough disposable income to weather the storms and keep going to the pub regardless, and therefore pubs (in general) are in deep trouble.


There's competition, too. Even if everything else remained the same, you'd expect more entertainment options to result in fewer pub visits.

> is the tax on alcohol at pubs higher than at a store?

No, but the tax on food - which is where a lot of money lies, for most pubs in this day and age - is. Also, business rates end up being significantly higher per unit of alcohol sold. This means stores can keep alcohol prices very low (even under cost, as a promotional item).

Add to that that alcohol consumption rates are decreasing overall, sugar tax affecting non-alcoholic drinks, energy prices skyrocketing, etc.


Bars and pubs aren't really competing against the store or restaurants, they're competing against you drinking alone or with only close friends. If stepping in to have a beer and shoot the shit would cost a significant chunk of a day's wages, you just won't do it, but if I can buy more beer with an hours wages than I can drink in an hour, it's not a bad time.

Weatherspoons charge under £3 for a pint in town. That's 15 minutes at minimum wage.

Beer was far more expensive 25 years ago - £1.60 in 2000 in the student pub when I first started buying my own beer, that was about half an hour at minimum wage.

On the cost side: Wages are higher, energy costs more, rent is higher (because if the pub can't operate the owner can get planning permission to convert it to a private dwelling and sell it for £600k rather than making £12k a year in rent)

On the demand side: People are healthier and drink less. It's nowhere near as acceptable to go out for a few pints at lunch time. People can't drive to a rural pub.


> Weatherspoons charge under £3 for a pint in town. That's 15 minutes at minimum wage.

Yeah but then you've to drink at spoons.


The thing is, they've purchased so many historic pubs, that if you refuse to drink at one that's a choice. I'm not saying that's a terrible choice, but it's a choice that bars you from an awful lot of pubs.

isn't weatherspoons like getting drunk at applebees basically? comparing that to a "pub" is kinda laughable

Not really. Applebee’s is still too food oriented.

Wetherspoons are definitely pubs. They just have a reputation for cheap drinks and cheap meals. But there’s still a significant proportion of people who go there for drinks only.

It’s more like a drinking warehouse with carpet on the floor and a menu of mostly beige food than a larger version of a cosy country pub with a roaring fire and a varied food menu sometimes involving vegetables that have not been deep fried.


It's the VA for survivors of the 1980s as it doesn't allow music or TV inside, so tends to get ignored by the soccer followers of a weekend and the younger generation entirely.

TBF their curry club and other food specials are basically subsidising old bachelors to the point of being an ersatz social service @ £8.45 to £11.45, including a drink, for 12 hours of service every Thursday.

https://thewetherspoonsmenu.uk/wetherspoons-curry-club-menu/

Generally speaking, its best described as the RyanAir of pubs. It gets you there, cheaply, but the juice may not be worth the squeeze in terms of ambience and clientele.


no music or tv? that sounds fucked... why don't ppl just drink in a park? iirc public drinking is actually legal in the uk?

(I know in some countries it's actually not -- Bratislava being one surprising example, though some cops were really chill when I was like hey sorry, I thought this was allowed, it's cold out so I bought a pounder and I wanted to warm up on the way to my hostel I'm not trying to bother anyone... though maybe they may have been letting me slide mostly because they were amused by what a pounder is once I defined it)

(A pounder is a big can of beer that got it's nickname because American frat bros will "pound" (chug) it to get very drunk quickly in places where the sales of beer are looser than liquor)


Isn’t it a pounder because it’s 16oz (US fluid ounces) which is a (US) pound?

(Note a US pint is about 474ml compared to the UK pint which is 568ml).

Of course US fluid ounces are a different size to UK (Imperial) fluid ounces. Plus the UK has 20 (Imperial) fluid ounces in a UK pint whilst the US has 16 (US) fluid ounces in a US pint.

How does it go? “A pint’s a pound the whole world around, except the UK where a pint of water is a pound and a quarter.”

As for drinking in a park, it is either something you do in the height of summer, or something you do if you are a tramp. There’s not much middle ground.


I have been to a nice ones, like the one in Exeter (but the owner is from there so that figures); I forgot the other two that were nice. Not many nice ones but they do exist.

That is spoons though, most pubs are 3-4x that

Most expensive pint I've paid round here was £6, so pubs are about 2x that - about half hour of adult minimum wage, same as spoons charged 25 years ago.

So how do spoons make a profit?

The main difference that I see is that they buy cheap properties and thus don't have crushing rents.

What this page doesn't show is the increase in rent for these buildings.


One thing I've heard is that they have consistent high throughput so they will buy beer that's closer to expiry and hence cheaper, because they know people will drink it before it goes off.

Dunno how much of an effect that is, it can only account for so much.


yeh that's what I always hear, but I don't know if its just an urban legend. I guess the fact that they buy in massive bulk also helps

> So how do spoons make a profit?

Think about the price of a keg of beer - much cheaper/pint than buying beer at a pub or from anywhere else in a smaller size. Very high-volume customers have contracts with distributors that can get them even better deals, sometimes significantly better.

Alcohol is pretty much always sold at a huge markup though - 4-5x is standard in the US. UK regulation might be different, but it's likely that the majority of costs in the pub business are in insurance and licensing rather than alcohol and rent.


To be fair actually £6 a pint does sound more like it, I think I'm getting confused with rounds (so I most often spend £10-£12, but I'm buying two pints)

3-4x £3 a pint? That's £9-£12 which is super expensive - I would say most places are in the £6-£8 region.

Yeh responded to another comment saying the same thing, Im getting confused with rounds. So I am spending £9-£12, but thats buying two pints

Maybe spoons is killing all the pubs.

Surely if you can consider the second order effects of giving away these extra potatoes for free, then you can also consider the second order effects of not giving them away? And maybe even thinking more about it, consider that they may be going to different markets/people/causes?

Given this example is about 1T batches of potatoes, it could be used by a business that depends on cheap potatoes like a food kitchen, or a business that can absorb the input surge and convert it into a product that can be stored longer term like frozen foods.


Could you clarify your usage of “fourth world” - other than as a derogatory term to refer to those you consider lower than the already quite unfortunate “third world” term?

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_World


I assumed it was like the 4th sector:

- for-profit - government - non-profit - criminal

Or maybe the 4th estate?


Yeah, and heavily rewritten by AI. Every single sentence screams AI slop smell. I find that short content smells the most - AI tends to overfit its patterns even more strongly then.

“Not a shutdown—something worse. The routers didn't go silent. They screamed.”

“This wasn't a cascade—it was coordinated demolition.”

puking noises


I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed that and got yucked by it. I was genuinely looking for a contact email on the webpage to complain to them about it. Such pretty visualization of data to then have LLM garbage explain it.

I’m learning there’s a significant portion of the population that is completely unbothered and unnoticing of AI slop smell. Some days I wish I could ignore or tolerate it too, given how prevalent it has become so quickly - but it repulses me too much.

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

Search: