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

>That's ridiculous. Phones are being made more and more of a requirement to participate in society, including by governments.

The latter is what's ridiculous, not what the parent suggests.


>Then you can still pretty much "stick to cash" by withdrawing the whole thing on your payday.

Not if you want to make a purchase beyond a small amount, like $500 or $1000. Then it has to be through some fucking bank or CC.


>The only reason the deep state or anyone has any power is because most people don't care. If people cared, we could change.

Yes, but that's just restating the problem.


>People find their ring cameras too useful, businesses love cloud based security camera systems, facial recognition and cloud backup are expected features of every phone's photo app, courts consider recording integral to first amendment expression.

As long as the recordings aren't centrally stored and sold in bulk, and sold to brokers and governments, that would still be ok.


>Why would you invest in nuclear power, which is several times more expensive per kwh

Because the related lobby pays well and a huge power station project (which runs well into the tens of billions) has much larger space for bribes


Alternatively, because nuclear power still works at night.

If only we had some way to store energy

At scale.

You mean like 27 Gwh of yearly installed capacity kind of scale? https://www.solarpowereurope.org/press-releases/new-report-e...

Nice, that gets us enough battery to survive winters in 10 000 years.

Now linearly extropolate oil supply numbers from just prior to Ford's Model-T.

How many thousands of years pass before we can meet current 2096 oil demand?


That is why we need to stop with oil quickly, yes. Nuclear will do that, and people will pick nuclear if the renewables aren't there yet when oil runs out, which it is close to doing today.

No, that is why you made a gross error extrapolating grid battery growth.

> when oil runs out, which it is close to doing today.

Peak oil is a way off yet, and the reason we need to stop using sequestered carbon is because atmospheric insulation is increasing steadily as a direct result of fossil fuel usage. Not because of ground supply shortfall.

The current events highlight the supply chain issue - not a shortage of oil, it's a shortfall in "oil going anywhere".

> Nuclear will do that, and people will pick nuclear if the renewables aren't there

Again, country by country - nuclear makes sense in China, the US to a degree, France, the UK (despite the snails progress) to a degree ... but makes no sense in, say, Australia that has abundant sunlight, fresh air that moves, and near zero prior experience with nuclear power and plant construction (See: the very recent Australian CSIRO report on energy futures for Australia)


>energy shock sparks global push to reduce fossil fuel dependence

That would be the stupidest takeaway


How so?

if my country has 0 dependence on fossils, how many fucks would I have given for whatever is happening or will be happening in the future in shithole places like the middle east?

Won't someone think of the children, how are their schools going to get bombed if we dont do it?

we don’t care about all children, just selective children, yes?

Children in Sudan? Myanmar? Sahel/Nigeria? Ethiopia? Or we care about just specific children and others not so much?

Sounds exactly like what a bot would say, especially an account created "14 hours ago" to just post 3 similarly empty comments:

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=nytrox


Another 30-40% just didn't get caught because the reviewers also used LLM in their "reviews"

I think you've misunderstood something. This is not about rejecting LLM-written articles. It is about rejecting the articles of people who used LLMs for their reviews.

So your quip is just nonsensical.


Those second-level reviewers, checking whether the first-level authors used LLMs in their reviews, also used LLMs to do their screening, and the latter missed it in many cases.

My original point (loosely based on the subject, not TFA) is that it's LLMs all the way down, way more than it's "measured" to be.


Hacker News was born out of the VC ecosystem, but was never about startups, they were like 10% of the content, or less

>There are plenty of Linux operating systems that prize stability over feature richness.

It's a choice between arbitrary changes and constant redesigns every 4-5 years, versus bare-bones distros and DEs.

The parent asks for a third option: well featured, mature, distros that don't change for the sake of it, but still have the features.


> well featured, mature, distros that don't change for the sake of it, but still have the features

I’m arguing this niche barely exists. Folks who want to run modern software tend to want something that “looks” modern.


>Folks who want to run modern software tend to want something that “looks” modern.

Looks that way because nobody asked them, and marketing types and designers decide for them...


fedora. stable, not bleeding edge but frequently updated (twice a year).

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

Search: