Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | oompydoompy74's commentslogin

The audience is goobers.


Totally agree. This article really turned me off of ever using Zig for a project.


The confusion of democracy with populism seems to be a trend over the past decade. Popularity is not democracy. In fact it’s often best if everyone is a little bit unhappy with whatever concession they are making.


How can you tell the difference in a democratic system between something being popular and it being democratic?


Hotter, with more microplastics and pollution. More extinct species. More counties with nukes. More hungry people. More trillionaires. Less to go around.

I hope I’m in the woods and not in an office.


Legality doesn’t matter as long as you use open source tools. Buy hardware that you can load your own software or firmware on. Keep backups of the software that you use. Nobody can take away an open weight model sitting on my NAS. Almost everything my family uses is self hosted. Stop depending on the government and companies to do the right thing.


This is ultrasound. You didn’t read the article. It’s perfectly safe.


I’m not sure that there is a consistent definition for matters in this context. What matters is completely subjective to an individual. Furthermore, performance is rarely correlated with success and compensation in an enterprise. I could just as easily say that playing the game is what matters.


Their “in house models” are reportedly basically just Kimi.


Replied on the other comment about this, but putting it here:

> See here https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5

> 85% of the compute for the final model is from them, and not the base Kimi model.

Of course they could be lying, but it seems feasible that they are adding a lot on top of this


Past, Present, and Future. If you control the means of production you win. Knowledge, skill, and experience are largely irrelevant to the conversation. I’ve held this opinion for quite some time and would be interested to hear alternative perspectives.


That's clearly wrong, because capital doesn't just appear out of thin air. You are ignoring that there's clearly rare skills involved that enable a few to become very successful. Your strawman only applies to the second generation that inherits wealth, and case in point inherited wealth tends to disappear in a couple of generations further proving that skill is required to build and maintain wealth.


> Past, Present, and Future. If you control the means of production you win.

Yeah, but we were talking about only success, not winning.

In the past and the present, you could succeed purely on a combination of skill, talent and labour. This approach looks like it will not work much longer.


I can see where you're coming from.

We exchange our knowledge, time, and skill for money. If this exchange is no longer viable — because similar value can be accessed via LLM agents — we'll have no way of making money.

I do think some (non-billionaire) people will survive the transition, but the question then becomes: what happens to everyone else?


I’m of the opinion that projects like this should start hosting Forgejo instances in countries with favorable laws and just mirroring to Github for exposure.


or something decentralised, like radicle (https://radicle.dev)


Notably radicle is reportedly compatible with seed nodes that bridge between (ie are simultaneously available on) clearnet and overlays such as tor. (I haven't personally tested this just repeated what I read elsewhere.)


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

Search: