Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | satellite2's commentslogin

Exactly, his whole tirade felt extraordinarily far fetched, sketchy if not outright racist.

Well it's 2025, we've just spent the better half of the year discussing the bitter lesson. It seems clear solving more general problem is key to innovation.


Hardware is not like software. A general purpose humanoid cleaning robot will be superior to a robot vacuum but it will always cost an order of magnitude more. This is different from software where the cost exponentially decreases and you can do the computer in the cloud.


I'm not sure advancements in AI and advancements in vacuum cleaners are at similar stages in terms of R&D. I'd be very wary of trying to apply lessons from one to the other.


Alternatively:

  enclave, err := secret.GetEnclave()
  // err contains whether the platform doesn't support it
  enclave.Do(f)


Incredible teamwork: OOP dismantles society in paragraph form, and OP proudly outsources his interpretation to an LLM.. If this isn’t collective self-parody, I don’t know what it is.


Are those really standardized in the US?

Where I live the condition vary widely. And basically the switching costs might easily dominate the total costs if you move/sell.

I've found that taking this into account it was better to trade a few places in term of interests for better conditions.


Yes, extremely, especially for confirming loans: https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/originating-underwriting/...

Patrick McKenzie (https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=patio11) has a great deep dive on this: https://www.bitsaboutmoney.com/archive/mortgages-are-a-manuf...

Closing/switching costs are certainly a consideration still, but the "Truth in Lending Act" (TILA) made it easier to compare the all-in cost by providing a standardized APR number, which is what the dashboard focuses on.


* conforming loans


Dynamic led plate that are totp. Where you can determine who is who on which date only with central access.


Of course. But what if the holding lives in a country that don't enforce this (or is too weak to). Then all the subsidiaries are really sovereign from the host country perspective.

It seems the solution is ages old. Don't have the holding incorporated in an empire...


How would this work in practice? If the empire wants to get at your data, why do you think it would shy away from pressuring a country so weak that it can't afford to enforce this on their companies?


Then the empire just says that they want the data or you won't be allowed to operate in the empire, which would be bad for profits and anger shareholders.


I'm not sure about this.

If the job market is representative of this then we can see that as both sides uses it and are getting better it's becoming an arms race. Looking for a job two years ago using ChatGPT was the perfect timing but not any more. The current situation is more applications per position and thus longer decision time. The end result is that the duration of unemployment is getting longer.

I'm afraid the current situation, which as described in the article is favorable to customers, is not going to last and might even reverse.


In the job market, information asymmetry would mainly be at play during comp negotiations, not during the interview process


for people who cheat, it is still the ideal time to look for a job before companies return to in-person hiring. i interview nowadays and it is crazy how ubiquitous these cheating tools are.


We have proctored testing centers (Pearson Vue etc) if companies wanted trusted remote interviews.


We've decided to do onsites for all hires, in part to combat this.


Good - it costs the company more $$$ and cheating is still easy as hell.

We have proof that the "Anal beads chess cheating" accusations could have been legit (https://github.com/RonSijm/ButtFish). You think that people won't do even easier cheating for a chance at a 500K+ FAANG job?

Also, if you want the best jobs at Foundation model labs (1 million USD starting packages), they will reject you for not using AI.


> they will reject you for not using AI.

Well, I don't work for a foundation model lab. But actually, I'm happy for folks to use AI to augment their skills.

I also want to make sure that they can use it well and aren't just a mouthpiece for ChatGPT. Having them come in is one way to verify that.


low quality comment

> they will reject you for not using AI.

False - many biglabs will explicitly ask you to not use AI in portions of their interview loop.

> We have proof that the "Anal beads chess cheating" accusations could have been legit (https://github.com/RonSijm/ButtFish). You think that people won't do even easier cheating for a chance at a 500K+ FAANG job?

Just nonsense.

> 1 million USD starting packages

False.


Same, between the interview cheating and AI slop resumes... hiring has become a dreadful process.


Yeah, hiring was always hard but has just become mind bogglingly difficult.


why are the cheating tools even necessary?


say more in your question?


Your meta-analysis is one degree too high. You were going to have the long tail anyway. It just shows there was an interest for the deviant.


Do you mind citing providers/product names?


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

Search: