a4isms

This place discusses SpaceX technical things all the time. But SpaceX is not a research lab. It's a company. That does business. And is going public. Taking a little time off from arguing about thrust and payload to talk about their business paratices, lobbying and late-stage capitalism is not only appropriate here...

Look around you. This may be called "Hacker News," but it is run by and for the benefit of a business, YCombinator. Speaking bluntly, if you come here only to talk tech, you're only getting half of the HN value proposition. The value of HN is that it mixes business with pleasure, so to speak. Many people here will either work for a tech business or found one. You can find technical discussions everywhere. Business discussions tailored for tech? That's actually very, very valuable.

One manager no-hires you because you don't post enough. Another doesn't like what you post. A third thinks you post too much. A fourth is pleased you seem to pay more attention to shipping products than hot takes. A fifth loves your hot takes.

So you get a call and are asked to do a coding thing. One person no-hires you because you wrote fizz-buzz by hand and didn't use Claude. Another wants to see that you know how to code by hand, but although your solution is fast, compact, and correct, it isn't the solution they had in mind.

At the end of the day, it's a highly inefficient, mostly irrational process dominated by social factors rather than objective feature detection.

Meanwhile, a different take:

Now, what we’ve been told about models is that they’re only as good as their training data. And so languages with gargantuan amounts of training data ought to fare best, right? Turns out that models kind of universally suck at Python and Javascript (comparatively). The top performing languages (independent of model) are C#, Racket, Kotlin, and standing at #1 is Elixir.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47410349

Whether it's testes or testy language, getting personal and insulting does not meet my personal standard for assuming good intent and being worthy of an open-minded attempt to create constructive dialogue.

But I applaud you for wanting to lift the standard of discourse!

If they did, why did they hold it back just to speak so contemptuously of a subject that is actually interesting and reasonably well explained?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubadQ1jcWOM

And the late Jaco Pastorius with the bass harmonics song that would have broken the Internet if we had had the internet when he released his first solo album:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsZ_1mPOuyk

Speaking as a person who owns basses... I like the sound of harmonics on a bass better. I think it's something to do with the longer strings giving more play to the overtones.

https://sites.google.com/site/steveyegge2/five-essential-pho...

Question three is this:

Last year my team had to remove all the phone numbers from 50,000 Amazon web page templates, since many of the numbers were no longer in service, and we also wanted to route all customer contacts through a single page.

Let's say you're on my team, and we have to identify the pages having probable U.S. phone numbers in them. To simplify the problem slightly, assume we have 50,000 HTML files in a Unix directory tree, under a directory called "/website". We have 2 days to get a list of file paths to the editorial staff. You need to give me a list of the .html files in this directory tree that appear to contain phone numbers in the following two formats: (xxx) xxx-xxxx and xxx-xxx-xxxx.

How would you solve this problem? Keep in mind our team is on a short (2-day) timeline.

In Yegge's case, he explicitly does NOT want a hand-written program, he wants the candidate to suggest a CLI tool, e.g.

grep -l -R --perl-regexp "\b(\(\d{3}\)\s|\d{3}-)\d{3}-\d{4}\b" > output.txt

———

So...

These questions aren't good or bad unto themselves, but when the person asking is engaging in "Guess the answer I'm thinking of," don't beat yourself up if you guessed wrong. Your answer might be prized by someone else with an enormous amount of experience hiring engineers.

Is that how it works where you are? Because over here, the best way to win an award from a publication is to advertise in that publication. Advertise enough, and you'll also become their go-to when they need a quote about anything vaguely related to your restaurant or other business, and once a year or so they'll print some hagiographic article about the amazing things going on under your leadership.

What I can say is that every reference I've found to Bill Gosper's algorithm describes the data structure as an immutable quadtree with canonicalized nodes, id est, there is extensive structure sharing in a Game of Life quadtree. That in turn facilitates heavy memoization.

The wikipedia entry for Quad Trees mentions Hashlife explicitly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadtree

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashlife

https://raganwald.com/2017/01/12/time-space-life-as-we-know-...

Why not? I am a descendant of Africans. I am a mildly successful author by tech nerd standards. I was educated in the British Public School tradition, right down to taking Latin in high school and cheering on our Rugby* and Cricket teams.

If someone doesn't want to read my words or employ me because I must be AI, that's their problem. The truth is, they won't like what I have to say any more than they like the way I say it.

I have made my peace with this.

———

Speaking of Rugby, in 1973 another school's Rugby team played ours, and almost the entire school turned out to watch a celebrity on the other school's team.

His name was Andrew, and he is very much in the news today.

Alice joins a group ride. Poseur Patty greets her:

"Check out my new top-of-the-line bike! It costs more than my car!!"

Alice nods:

"Yeah, I have a similar car."

Perhaps the author is not a coward, but is giving the company time to respond and commit to a fix for the benefit of other owners who could suffer harm.

A “centaur” is a human being who is assisted by a machine (a human head on a strong and tireless body). A reverse centaur is a machine that uses a human being as its assistant (a frail and vulnerable person being puppeteered by an uncaring, relentless machine).

https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2025-09-11...

Ah! Well, if we put aside "The Innovator's Dilemma" and pick up Reis and Trout's "marketing Warfare," we get the answer. Apple does have an existing business, but investing in AI does not cannibalize it. They can throw money at it, try to find a way to make it work really, really well for consumers on very specific custom hardware in their devices...

Likewise, someone like Google has all the money in the world to throw at it, but they aren't investing in a new market, they're defending their search business against everyone just asking a generative AI Chatbot questions. I\But it's possible for them to screw this up internally over turf wards, just ask the engineers who tried to make search better but were kneecapped by Prabhakar Raghavan who demanded that search be poor enough to drive people to click sponsored results.

In the "Marketing Warfare" model, Apple is attempting a flanking attack: An outsider trying to disrupt the AI giants with an approach that they can't imitate without undermining their value proposition. On-device AI flanks the big giants that areservcie-centric.

And in that model, Google is playing defence, which is what every leader is supposed to do. Their job is to "cover every move," which they are doing in textbook fashion. If AI goes away, Google dry their tears and continue to mine ad revenue.

Heh heh, I was in the Sailing Cub in high school, and our Sailing Master (RIP Master Gibb) said literally the same thing about learning to navigate with sextant and chronometer even though we never sailed out of sight of land. It was all about deep respect for the history and tradition of being a Mariner.

Now I fly gliders, "the purest form of flight," and while you can get a glider with electrically operated landing gear, a jet sustainer engine, and digital navigation and flight computing devices...

There is something extraordinarily pure about the exercise of flying with everything electrical turned off (except for the transponder and radio for safety). And even purer... Flying with covered instruments so we don't even get analogue airspeed and altitude.

Circling back to slide rules... Sometimes we crave that simplicity, that direct experience of a thing.

https://social.bau-ha.us/@raganwald/115979168665997624

Although slide rules are a "dead skill," Aviators typically learn to use something called an E6B Flight Computer, which works on the same principle as a round slide rule.

https://pilotinstitute.com/e6b-made-easy/

I have one in my flight bag and was required to demonstrate proficiency in its use. Of course we fly with connected digital devices these days, but having an analogue backup that operates even if the power fails is important.

But what makes us think R.U.R. is still about robots is that the play is explicit that the robots are assembled, not grown:

> His robots resemble more modern conceptions of man-made life forms, such as the Replicants in Blade Runner, the "hosts" in the Westworld TV series and the humanoid Cylons in the re-imagined Battlestar Galactica, but in Čapek's time there was no conception of modern genetic engineering (DNA's role in heredity was not confirmed until 1952). There are descriptions of kneading-troughs for robot skin, great vats for liver and brains, and a factory for producing bones. Nerve fibers, arteries, and intestines are spun on factory bobbins, while the robots themselves are assembled like automobiles. Čapek's robots are living biological beings, but they are still assembled, as opposed to grown or born.

How about 1920: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.U.R.

I also do not allow my lifted pickup and Model Y neighbours to choose my vehicle for me.

I drive a wagon. Of course wagon owners talk about the utility. And yet, you can buy a wagon with a twin-turbo V8 engine. What's the "sportwagon" segment all about? Certainly not going to Home Depot to buy four toilets for the new house, it's about putting your $15,000 Cannondale Black Ink MTB on the roof and swanking up to the trailhead.

A working truck should be max utility. Around the core market of "working trucks," there are various wannabe truck products that do not have to be max utility. For example, a Subaru Brat or a Hyundai Santa Fe. Niche products compared to an F-150, but they had/have their fans.

I personally can't stand the design, but the idea of an impractical "halo vehicle" that appeals to a niche audience but burnishes the brand as "forward-looking" is not a bad one. It's just the execution of this particular halo vehicle that I would have a problem with were I in the market for a lifestyle look-at-me vehicle.

You do not mention the perception of asymmetric legal and market power. Many people think that file sharing Disney movies is ok, but Google scraping the art of independent artists to create AI is not ok. That is not the same dynamic at all as not caring about copyright, and then suddenly caring about copyright.

Look at how much they are spending. Think about how HN cheered Tesla's innovation in disintermediating vehicle sales by selling direct. Now think about OpenAI or whomever selling directly to enterprises. It's the same proposition:

"That Enterprise SaaS startup adds a markup to the AI that is powering your app."

Again, this is only IF the AI-vangelists are correct that some startups will collapse to a solopreneur. I am not sure that those same startups won't vanish entirely.\

———

There are some high-stakes apps where Enterprises prefer vendors for extrinsic reasons. For example, some apps must have certain certifications, and in a vibe-coded future, the cost of certification could exceed the cost of development by multiple orders of magnitude. And it needs to be kept up. Another example would be apps where for liability reasons, it is helpful that there be an "industry standard."

But lots and lots and lots of apps are not nearly so consequential.

I have run and worked for businesses in which dissenting views were important to our success. I don't personally find your argument persuasive.

But I do know people who find that kind of thing very persuasive: I think it would most appeal to the type of person who believes that groups of people should be managed in a strict hierarchal manner, with the people on top managing things for their own benefit.

And—confirmation bias alert—IMO that's absolutely what both of America's parties do, and why it is difficult for their voters to get even of a fraction of the benefits that the donors (who may donate to both parties) enjoy.