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

Couple is not really debatable - it has a definition that includes 2. Not 2 or 3, or any more than 2. Just 2.

What if you have a couple of couples? I think if it’s a couple, meaning two, that a couple couples could be two of however many the original couple is for the first couple, and the third one might couple with both members of the original couple, so I could see three as being a couple to a certain reading, though paradoxically four seems like one too many unless they are two couples of either one or a couple of kinds.

The Meriam-webster dictionary definition number 4 for couple is an indefinite small number: few.

I remember being confused as a kid what the difference is between a couple and a few. Turns out sometimes there is no difference.



That's... bold. Yeah, the development process is different from what we're used to seeing with government-led programs, but so far most stages of starship have proven viable (ie they've worked at least once) and each launch gets closer.

This claim also seems to ignore historical context - people said the same things about Falcon, then Falcon Heavy but those launch every few days now. You're basically saying that either you know more than the single most successful and experienced team of engineers in reusable space launch vehicle world, or they're busy burning their own cash by committing some sort of fraud.


There's fraud everywhere where Musk is, so there's that. When it comes to the engineering team Starship is not engineering by the same team as Falcon - some key people left the company. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to know that the Starship is flawed. SpaceX doesn't hide the fact that it currently can't do 100T as promised - only 50T is likely. Unfortunately they can even get it up when empty so there's that.


if you were looking at a 10' tall spider and a 36' tall spider, yes they'd both be big but it'd be fair to say that the 10' one is much smaller....


> I think the difference between Vertex and Gemini APIs is that Vertex is meant for existing GCP users and Gemini API for everyone else

Nahh, not really - Vertex has a HUGE feature surface, and can run a ton of models and frameworks. Gemini happens to be one of them, but you could also run non-google LLMs, non LLM stuff, run notebooks against your dataset, manage data flow and storage, and and and…

Gemini is “just” an LLM.


> No other local clients currently interop very well with MCP Tooling

Not even close to true - VSCode and cursor both have MCP support, and INE VSCode’s is great.

Also, I’m curious about your claim to have spent 10 months building MCP servers, as the spec has only been out since the end of November - which is ~7 months.


VSCode won't iterate without constant permissions/interrupts. No thanks Cursor.

10 months must have been hyperbole but I've moved two states and a country in that time, apologies.


GP said ML, not Ai - Google’s entire search and ad businesses are run on ML, as are many of the moonshots of alphabet (deep mind, Waymo, etc).


This is only true for the free tier. Paid Ai Studio users have strong privacy protections.


Can you elaborate on “paid” ? Because I honestly still have no idea if my usage of AI Studio is used for training purposes.

I have google workspace business standard, which comes with some pro AI features. Eg, Gemini chat clearly shows “Pro”, and says something like “chats in your organization won’t be used for training”. On AI Studio it’s not clear at all. I do have some version of paid AI services through Google, but no idea if it applies to AI studio. I did create some dummy Google cloud project which allowed me to generate api key, but afaik I still haven’t authorized any billing method.


Thank you for clarifying that. I’ve researched this once again and confirmed that Google treats all AI Studio usage as private if there’s at least one API project with billing enabled in an account.


That’s not negotiating- I can’t connect to a server over v4 and have it tell me to switch to v6 or vice versa. That’s just supporting 2 completely different protocols.


Right. The closest thing we have to IPv6 "negotiation" is the Happy Eyeballs algorithm[0], which is literally just "connect to both at the same time and pick the one that connects first". The name serves to legitimise it and make it sound fancy but it's basically just brute force + a bit of caching.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Eyeballs


So tear down every city in the country and rebuild them all from scratch, then force the ~45% of people that don’t live in those cities to move there.

And that’s better than mandating a small percentage of the population use FSD cars?

Not sure I like the autocratic tone of that plan


This is a pretty uncharitable read of the parent poster. Many cities are upzoning, which means that corridors are being torn down and built more densely. During those times, we're seeing a lot more mixed use, walkable and bikeable spaces introduced. In Seattle we're seeing streets being closed and lanes being removed to support biking and walking.

You can make walkable enclaves neighborhood by neighborhood. And those sites are really desirable. Especially near transit. The right approach is to build more like this until there's no one left who wants to live there and cannot. For the remaining folks who have no interest in it, sure, they can have automated cars.

But right now the line is out the door for this sort of place and we cannot build them fast enough.


> This is a pretty uncharitable read of the parent poster.

Which is pretty fair because the parent poster was using a very uncharitable read of what they were replying to. 10000% the wrong approach, really?


They are - in that OS updates are delivered in and extracted from disk images. Not sure how they could be any more involved…


Not this kind of disk image. ASIF is a read-write disk image; an OS update would be distributed in a read-only image (if it is indeed a disk image).


Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

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

Search: