Hacker News Reader

randomdataon Analysis of economic and productivity losses caused by cookie banners in Europe

DNT does not provide informed consent. It may, if set to not track, imply denial, but the reverse is not true. If DNT is accepting or unset, the site needs to fall back to the banner to get consent. And at that point you may as well prompt everyone with the banner instead of complicating the codebase with extra logic for a DNT edge case.

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

> Unless you think it's not possible to figure out problems and you can only do them by rote memorization?

It is not possible to solve a problem from scratch. You must first invent the universe, as they say. Any solution you come up with for a new problem will build upon solutions others have made for earlier problems.

In the current age, under a real-world scenario, you are going to use AI to help discover those earlier solutions on which to build upon. Before AI you would have consulted a live human instead. But humans, while not what we consider artificial, are what we consider intelligent and therefore presumably fall under the same rule, so that distinction is moot anyway.

Which means that, without access to the necessary tools during the interview, any pre-existing solution you might need to build upon needs to be memorized beforehand. If you fail to remember, or didn't build up memories of the right thing, before going into the interview, then you can't possibly solve the problem, even if you are quite capable of problem solving. Thus, it ends up being a test of memory, not a test of problem solving ability.

And for what? AI fundamentally cannot solve new problems anyway. At best, it can repeat solutions to old problems already solved, but why on earth would you be trying to solve problems already solved in the first place? That is a pointless waste of time, and a severe economic drain for the business. Being able to repeat solutions to problems already solved is not a useful employment skill.

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

Or 1930s Great Depression no work for almost five years tough?

I expect most people here won't have a good sense for 2009. While it wasn't great for many industries, for tech it was the "app" boom. You couldn't hardly go outside without someone throwing money at you.

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

> You can’t make $85 an hour playing with your computer as a gardener

But if you step up to being a farmer then you'll be playing with way more interesting computers than you'll find on a typical desk.

> (Although, apparently it’s not likely you can you do it as a dev in today’s market so)

Farming isn't in good economic shape right now either, granted.

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

On the bright side, racist thoughts creeping into classes who haven't been exposed to circumstances that lead to racist thoughts before might become more understanding of and helpful towards those who have contended with them for ages instead of simply dismissing them as people born with "incorrect thoughts". Racism is never actually about race.

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

What are you offering in return?

randomdataon AI makes tech debt more expensive

In my experience you need a high quality codebase to be able to iterate at maximum speed. Any time someone, myself included, thought they could cut corners to speed up iteration, it ended up slowing things down dramatically in the end.

Coding haphazardly can be a lot more thrilling, though! I certainly don't enjoy the process of maintaining high quality code. It is lovely in hindsight, but an awful slog in the moment. I suspect that is why startups often need to sacrifice quality: The aforementioned thrill is the motivation to build something that has a high probability of being a complete waste of time. It doesn't matter how fast you can theoretically iterate if you can't compel yourself to work on it.

randomdataon AI makes tech debt more expensive

Perhaps it is the reverse: That ColdFusion training sources are limited, so it is more likely to converge on a homogenization?

While, causally, we usually think of a programming language as being one thing, but in reality a programming language generally only specifies a syntax. All of the other features of a language emerge from the people using them. And because of that, two different people can end up speaking two completely different languages even when sharing the same syntax.

This is especially apparent when you witness someone who is familiar with programming in language X, who then starts learning language Y. You'll notice, at least at first, they will still try to write their programs in language X using Y syntax, instead of embracing language Y in all its glory. Now, multiply that by the millions of developers who will touch code in a popular language like Python, Java, or Typescript and things end up all over the place.

So while you might have a lot more code to train on overall, you need a lot more code for the LLM to be able to discern the different dialects that emerge out of the additional variety. Quantity doesn't imply quality.

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

I assumed you were already dead by the time I got to reading your response. One does not normally tell you that they are dying if they expect to still be around for a long time. Shame on me for assuming. What is the expected lifespan for someone diagnosed with your condition?

randomdataon The Onion buys Infowars

> You cannot quantify it.

You can, within some reasonable margin, quantify the opportunity cost, though, which is what such reparations are intended to compensate.

Best I can find was that there were 15 plaintiffs, each representing a family. If we assume an average family of four, let's say there are 60 beneficiaries, or $25 million per person. That's about an order of magnitude more than the typical person would expect to make in their lifetime.

There should be something to suggest that they had an income trend or other demonstration of similar potential to have otherwise earned that much if Infowars/Alex Jones had not done what they did. I wonder what showed that?

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

RIP

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

Literally someone (or, at least, some thing) that can figure things out as problems arise? That seems quite generous. Unless you're solving a "problem" that has already been solved a million times before, it won't have a clue. These so-called AIs are predictive text generators, not thinking machines. But there is no need to solve a problem that is already solved in the first place, so...

It is really good at being a "college professor" that you can bounce ideas off of, though. It is not going to give you the solution (it fundamentally can't), but it can serve to help guide you. Stuff like "A similar problem was solved with <insert research paper>, perhaps there is an adaptation there for you to consider?"

We're long past a world where one can solve problems in a vacuum. You haven't been able to do that for thousands, if not millions, of years. All new problems are solved by standing on the shoulders of problems that were solved previously. One needs resources to understand those older problems and their solutions to pave the way to solving the present problems. So... If you can't use the tools we have for that during the interview, all you can lean on is what you were able to memorize beforehand.

But that doesn't end up measuring problem solving ability, just your ability to memorize and your foresight in memorizing the right thing.

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

> i did not know that one gender could be better at this work. that seems like huge news if true.

There is research that has shown that men are, on average, better at single-focus tasks. And, indeed, it was huge news at the time the research was published – at least as huge as being reported in major news publications is.

It wouldn't be huge news now. We quickly grow bored and tired of widely reported things from the past. Humans, of all genders it seems, tend to seek novelty.

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

Right, but certain careers have figured out that women are, on average, better at the socialization game and thus, broadly speaking, a better fit for the job. Ain't nobody "diversity" hiring on the oil rigs or other jobs where the physical act is more important than interpersonal interaction.

However, it is difficult to measure those positive traits for what they are, so employers are selecting based on gender hoping for positive correlation. But that's illegal, so "diversity" hiring was created as a scapegoat to help avoid legal fire.

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

There is an interesting dichotomy in your interview process. You say you want someone who can solve problems, but then go on to say (perhaps unintentionally; communication is hard) that you only want someone who has already rote-memorized how to solve the particular problems you throw at them, not someone who can figure things out as the problems arise.

randomdataon Looking for a Job Is Tough

Likely because it is not a good time to be a gardener (professionally) right now either. The tech job market and agriculture prosperity seem to track each other.

randomdataon GPTs Are Maxed Out

> Would you die if I make you hold a 1kg block of 10% pure uranium for an hour? Most people will answer yes. The real answer is no.

I'm not sure where you got this mistaken idea that holding a block of uranium for an hour unlocks immortality, but I'm afraid "most people" got it right. The answer is yes. Absolutely you would die. You would also die if you didn't hold the block, but so too if you did.

Was this comment written by a chatbot? It is not at all in line with human thought.

randomdataon Rust for tokenising and parsing

> Not a single person reading this thread believes that you are a coolly detached rational observer

All one of them?

> Responding to an argument by not only pretending not to have an opinion

The "argument" has only ever been about sharing of that which we understand as fact. One can present a case for why an apparent fact is not factual – mistakes and misinformation can, indeed, slip in – but what is fact would not rest on one's feelings towards it. The story of Go is the same whether you love it, hate it, ascribe no emotion towards it, or even if you have never heard of it before.

> but pretending not to understand the concept of having an opinion

Feeling and opinion traditionally do not imply the exact same thing – they are different words for a reason – so it is not clear if you misspoke, don't recognize a difference, or if you are trying to change the subject, but I will, for the sake of quality, assume the former. While I can understand feelings in some contexts, like feelings towards people, I have no idea why an inanimate programming language would conjure feelings? That is like developing feelings towards a grain of sand you found on the beach, which I don't understand either.

I am not about to claim nobody develops feelings for inanimate programming languages. Humans are varieitied and can do all sorts of weird and wonderful things, but that does not imply I understand it. Feel free to explain it, though. That's the beauty of not understanding something: You get to learn!

I mean, that's why I also asked last time. Surely you're not one of those anti-education types?

> Not sure it works

Okay, cool. Is this some kind of problem, or why are you mentioning it?

randomdataon Australian real estate agent hallucinates two schools in rental listing

Exactly what I want (or exactly what I don't want) is often a unique attribute of a home that is only available in the description. The higher level filters are a good way to narrow things down, but lacking in specific details. While you can progress interest to find that kind of thing out as well, it saves a lot of hassle when the description is right there.

randomdataon Argentinian Farmer Finds Family of 20k-Year-Old Car-Sized Armadillos

20k-year-old cars were smaller than the ones we are accustomed to today.

randomdataon GPTs Are Maxed Out

But in that case you're just adding an additional descriptor to "intelligence". Like "fast car". In the same vein as the original question, what would justify a "FC" moniker? Nothing, of course. There is nothing uniquely interesting about a fast car over any car to justify its own special term.

Nobody asked how you would define "artificial" and "intelligence" independently. The dictionary already has done that more than throughly. Logically, a definition for "AI" needs to be all encompassing. There are some out there that accomplish that, but you have straight up failed.

randomdataon The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

> The problem is that people who succeed in tech are able to effectively educate themselves

Not by magic, though. Those who take an interest in tech are forced to learn how to educate themselves in order to fulfill their interest in tech. The same story applies to many other interests. Of course, it is possible one will never develop any interests...

> But for most students, fitting in with peers and earning the respect of their teacher is the only reason they're bothering to learn at all.

But is socialization the only thing most children can take an interest in, or does sticking children in these rigid school environments take away from them discovering other interests? In other words, is this just a symptom of them being in the wrong environment, rather than the nature if it?

Furthermore, if socialization really is the only interest, why can't it still be used to force learning how to educate oneself? If fitting in and admiration are a compelling reason to learn in general, why would it not be equally compelling towards learning how to learn?

> Banding kids into grades is the only thing making most kids succeed.

Of course, that questions if most kids should succeed. What for? Being from the most educated region in the most educated nation, it's not clear what we actually get for it. The popular tropes don't hold up. Other parts of the world are much more progressive, economically vibrant, healthier, etc. It is hardly the worst place in the world, but a relative backwater compared to other much less educated places.

You don't have to go back many generations to find populations not exposed to much, if any, formal education and they don't seem to have ended up any worse off than the average person today. I expect there is a strong case to be made that people with a vision can leverage educational resources as a force multiplier to propel themselves well beyond what those earlier generations could have ever dreamed of been capable of, but for the average Joe just trying to fit in...? Perhaps we are missing the forest for the trees.

randomdataon The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

> The problem is that people expect teachers adopt to every single pupil.

Nah. The people expect EdTech to allow children to find their own suitable learning style with only babysitter oversight. But no teacher wants to "demote" themselves to being a babysitter, nor do the administrators want to become seen as running a daycare, so you end up with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42116365.

randomdataon The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

And variety of lecturers. Sometimes another person saying it changes everything.

randomdataon What I Wish Someone Told Me About Postgres

Most developers using these kinds of tools these days are actually building their own database management systems, just outsourcing the persistence to another DMBS, so there isn't a strong imperative to think about good design so long as it successfully satisfies the persistence need.

Whether we actually should be building DMBSes on top of DMBSes is questionable, but is the current state of affairs regardless.

randomdataon Peak population may be coming sooner than we think

> That's highly debatable.

Is it? You seem to stand pretty firm on your position (which is a fair one, for what it is worth).

randomdataon A neurology ICU nurse on AI in hospitals

> because workers didn't

Do you mean immediately? At peak inflation wages weren't keeping pace, but wage growth is exceeding inflation right now to catch back up.

Incomes have been, on average, stagnant for hundreds of years – as far back as the data goes. It is unlikely that this time will be different.

> I hope eventually there's a tipping point where the powers that be

You did mention the US. Presumably you're not talking about a dictatorship. The powers that be are the population at large. I'm sure they are acutely aware of this. They have to live it, after all.

randomdataon I'm a neurology ICU nurse. The creep of AI in our hospitals terrifies me

Yes, we can. But should we?

randomdataon Rust for tokenising and parsing

You are welcome to answer it any way you see fit, but relaying a real world experience in code where you found those aforementioned attributes to be pressing would be a concise way to answer it. I suggested that to help, as you were clearly struggling to broach the subject previously. Certainly don't hold back if you can do better.

There would be no logical reason to make up some imagined situation. I am not understanding your reason for mentioning it. What is the thought process behind your thinking there to help me better understand your intent?

Or, if this is just your subtle way of saying that you've never actually written any Go code in your life and are just making this up because you read someone like it elsewhere, then fine. So be it. But that would well and truly not be useful. Given that you are seemingly here in good faith we can be sure that is not what is going on here and look forward to your reasoned response.

randomdataon GPTs Are Maxed Out

Because communication requires understanding, and arbitrarily making up a random context gives no understanding to what the other person is thinking? If I wanted to communicate with myself, I could simply write in my private journal. Is this not the same reason you have asked the question you did?