Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | breakfastduck's comments login

My god this comment made me feel old.

God forbid you have to remember to save your work!


The mental model my kids have for work is that typing or even thinking is itself a finished product. For my generation that idea of a conscious action of saving your work on a computer made me think more about what I was doing and how I was doing it. But I am an old.


If you go back in time, there were editors that by default would save the previous version of a file to .bak, each time you saved the current status. The fear of accidental saving or editing and hence overwriting old good stuff was higher than accidentally loosing new good stuff. There was less protection of system files, config files etc, so chances were you would brick apps or even the OS. Things got more forgiving since.


I understand the overall contrast you're sketching here. But can you elaborate on

> typing or even thinking is itself a finished product

Any specific examples where you notice the difference?


Do you really long for that?

It's been over 20 year with auto-save being pretty common, one has to adapt to the modern times, especially when it makes things better.

I don't have to "remember to save my work" when I write on my notepad, why should it be different on a computer?


> Do you really long for that?

Yes, absoultely. Saving data you don't want saved and overwriting data you want to retain are just as bad as not saving data you want to keep.

Keeping a scratch file to restore from unexpected applications exits (crash, power loss, etc.) is fine but beyond that I expect to be in control of when and where things are saved.

> one has to adapt to the modern times

I expect my computers to adapt to my requirements, not the other way around.

> especially when it makes things better.

Modern rarely equals better.


Neither save strategy is 'the better one'. Next step would be that git auto-commits...


Wait until you discover pen and paper.


At my first job, one of my responsibilities was to write the product manuals. My boss would set a timer next to me and instruct me to ctrl-S every time it went off.

Corrective action from having lost work too many times :-)


I mean - yeah, honestly, god forbid. Requiring manual saves with limited change history (or none at all) was the bad old days. That was bad UI/UX, literally everybody had a “oops I forgot to save” and a “oops I saved and I didn’t mean to” horror story. Things are better now.


I wouldn't say it was totally awful. At least, prior to having an Undo option or perhaps an undo but that can only go back 3 steps, saving as before making any large changes was a pretty common workflow. I might end up with 50 versions of a document numbered incrementally by the time I was finished. that is still a necessary workflow for certain types of documents. I don't necessarily want everything saved automatically all the time.


I love my paper notebook to save everything automatically, I don't long for it to all disappear if I forget to press a button and give it a name.


No doubt you've learned a hell of a lot from this.

I would imagine this will set you up incredibly well for a career in the industry, arguably moreso than your actual degree. Any reasonable prospective potential hirer is gonna be super impressed by it I think.


> I would imagine this will set you up incredibly well for a career in the industry, arguably moreso than your actual degree.

That's what I hope at least. This is something I would want to do for my career in the future. Good portfolio never hurts :)


I think the widespread use of that for education would have precisely the opposite outcome that you'd want.

Nothing sinks in to anyones brain because they're not actually talking about it and they don't need to actually learn it for any reason in school because they can just ask the chatbot again at any moment.


I wonder if having offloaded arithmetic to calculators has led to a society that can't do math in their head well enough to make good choices at the supermarket or in other daily situations where simple math would be useful but the situation is too casual to pull out your calculator.

But the impact of that is tiny compared to the prospect of future generations offloading their general ideation and critical thinking to machines instead of just number crunching.


People internalize conversations and the thought processes that went into them. If I have a conversation with somebody, I often walk away remembering and understanding what somebody else said and why they said it. And these memories get used in future interactions. So just like the offloading of arithmetic likely resulted in people not being able to perform mental math, what would be the result of conversing with an AI that has hallucination/logical issues (a lesser intelligence)? Isn't it reasonable to guess that this will result in diminished reasoning?


I hadn't considered that. If that's the case then we should hope people simply copy and paste the output rather than try to engage with it or take it seriously.

Though in more practical economic terms, perhaps what we're being trained for is a future in which the typical worker has a low paying job sanity checking AI output rather than a higher paying job doing the work themself.


and that is a problem because?

i remember when maths teachers would scold me for not knowing my multiplication tables “are you going to carry a calculator around with you every day?” they would say when seeing me use one. Turns out i do.


That is such a tired, boring, selective memory meme. Did you not use a calculator later on in your education, say high school, for stuff like graphing and helping with equations? Do you not think educators in primary school teaching basic arithmetic knew about that?

All our maths education is based on lies which are progressively disclosed. You’re told we can’t go below zero, that numbers are integers, that you can’t take the square root of a negative number… And slowly are introduced to all those concepts building on what you learned before.

And yet this meme of “hur dur, mah teachers saids I’d haves no calculators on me but I use a phone all the time, epic fail” prevails instead of pondering for two seconds that maybe your teacher was giving a cookie-cutter argument that a literal child could comprehend but be unable to refute so they could continue with the damn lesson.

And as if people use calculators that often. They don’t. Yet being able to do some basic arithmetic is useful in such simple areas as shopping, to make more informed decisions in a world that is constantly trying to trick you.


Technological progress requires that we adapt education at the same time. We can still teach the ability to reason through problems when necessary, but still utilize technology when useful


If there is a good reason to, yes. To chase the latest trends (which is what all this EduLLM talk is all about) then definitely not.


That would not be a side effect of the dialogue, but from awareness of the wider world.


Because its very stable, very fast and very well documented / supported.


Absolutely incredible work


I hate and love this at the same time


You'd hope so, but this is likely a move to placate detractors so the army of Nintendo fans buy whatever insanely underpowered and overpriced device they eventually release.


Nintendo has fans because the software is good. Sure, the Switch was "underpowered", but if it plays the games I want to play, then who cares?

Also, I think the $700 PS5 Pro wants a word with you.


Depends how private the account they're posting the opinion on is!


Unless you want a very painful experience then you basically have to host it on vercel.


So far I've only used Next.js for static site generation, for a couple of long-term projects. Self-hosting it is as easy as any static site. Upgrading major versions of Next.js, however, has been fairly painful. The experience made me reconsider the decision to use it, and I'm keeping up on possible replacements like Remix. But honestly I'm getting a lot of value out of the framework that I'm in no hurry to change.

For dynamic sites that require running Next.js on the production server, I'm not too interested in trying because it feels like too much vendor lock-in. The same reason I wouldn't consider Vercel for hosting, since they develop the framework that is already a big dependency.


I think this is the key though really, and what peeves me the most.

NextJS is fine to self host if you don't need any of the features that actually make it worth dealing with all the additional complexity.

Essentially if you want any of the special sauce you have to host on vercel, or use opennext guides to build equivalent infra.

Its just not worth the complexity for me to use.


> the most transformative step forward since Next.js

I'd consider Next.js a giant step backwards, frankly.


Would you mind elaborating on this?


Worse things have been said about them


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: