uxhacker

It’s pretty scary. According to Barron’s, MicroStrategy, a bitcoin treasury company, alone makes up about 5% of the U.S. convertible bond market. That’s remarkable given that it isn’t a typical tech or biotech growth company issuing convertibles, but essentially a Bitcoin treasury company.

And when will it do class designs? Maybe this would solve many an AI coding issue.

Yes, to loosen the Model, but not to have no model. The new idea needs to be reintegrate back into the existing world models.

An example would be improvised jazz, the musicians need to bend the rules, but they still need some sense of key and rhythm to make it coherent.

Yes, everyone has a world model even a toddler has a casual model (“cry → mum comes”).

What stops imports?

I’m very dyslexic, so having AI in the loop is incredibly useful — especially for feedback.

But I have to guide it: “just list the changes,” “use English English,” and so on.

The fun’s still there — because the thinking is still mine.

Does using AI kill the dopamine loop?

I don’t think so.

I still spend the hours — because it needs to sound original. It needs to feel authentic. I have to add my own personal parts to the story.

I still struggle writing it.

The AI helps, but it doesn’t replace the work. The dopamine’s still there — because I’m still in the loop.

Because some LLMs are now multimodal—they can process and generate not just text, but also sound and visuals. In other words, they’re beginning to handle a broader range of human inputs and outputs, much like we do.

I recently have also been thinking about Jef Raskin’s book The Humane Interface. It feels increasingly relevant to now.

Raskin was deeply concerned with how humans think in vague, associative, creative ways, while computers demand precision and predictability.

His goal was to humanize the machine through thoughtful interface design—minimizing modes, reducing cognitive load, and anticipating user intent.

What’s fascinating now is how AI, changes the equation entirely. Instead of rigid systems requiring exact input, we now have tools that themselves are fuzzy, and probabilistic.

I keep thinking that the gap Raskin was trying to bridge is closing—not just through interface, but through the architecture of the machine itself.

So AI makes Raskin’s vision more feasible than ever but also challenges his assumptions:

Does AI finally enable truly humane interfaces?

I’m not a mathematician (just a programmer), but reading this made me wonder—doesn’t this kind of dimensional weirdness feel a bit like how LLMs organize their internal space? Like how similar ideas or meanings seem to get pulled close together in a way that’s hard to visualize, but clearly works?

That bit in the article about knots only existing in 3D really caught my attention. "And dimension 3 is the only one that can contain knots — in any higher dimension, you can untangle a knot even while holding its ends fast."

That’s so unintuitive… and I can't help thinking of how LLMs seem to "untangle" language meaning in some weird embedding space that’s way beyond anything we can picture.

Is there a real connection here? Or am I just seeing patterns where there aren’t any?

The BBC article seems to overstate the uniqueness of the service at Great Ormond Street Hospital. While it’s true that they are the first in the UK to offer a UKAS-accredited clinical metagenomics service (UKAS being the United Kingdom Accreditation Service, which certifies labs to meet medical testing standards like ISO 15189), metagenomics itself is already being used in several other places across the UK.

For example, the Earlham Institute, the University of Oxford, and the UK Health Security Agency are all actively involved in metagenomics research and surveillance.

For example: https://www.phgfoundation.org/blog/metagenomic-sequencing-in...

https://www.earlham.ac.uk/events/nanopore-metagenomics-sampl...

I’m trying to understand something broader about the U.S. tech economy and wondering what others think. How much of the money flowing into U.S. tech — particularly advertising spend on platforms like Meta and Google — is actually, indirectly, the result of America running a massive trade deficit? If dollars are going out to pay for imports (like ultra-cheap goods from Shein and Temu), those dollars have to come back in some form — often as investment in U.S. assets, including digital advertising.

Add to that the role of U.S. universities in driving innovation and attracting international capital, and it starts to look like this whole engine is powered by the very things that Trump’s tariffs and restrictions are pushing back against. Doesn’t that make his actions — while ostensibly protecting U.S. jobs — potentially anti-university and anti-investment in the longer term?

I’m genuinely asking this as someone without a background in economics and curious how others see it. Does anyone else think this crackdown might undercut the very ecosystem that’s funded a huge part of American tech?

So get the car delivered in Europe. Go on a driving holiday and then ship to the USA.

Not just that the pill works as well as the jab, but Lilly has stockpiled over a billion pills to meet expected demand.

What difficult to find metals do these batteries need?

It means personal ai on every computer. No privacy concerns, but saying that it is quite weird coming from a Chinese start up :)

So isn’t cursor just a tool for Claude or ChatGpt to use? Another example would be a flight booking engine. So why can’t an AI just talk direct to an IDE? This is hard as the process has changed, due to the human needing to be in the middle.

So Isn’t AI useless without the tools to manipulate?

It’s also weird that there is no about page naming the founders.

TDLR: The data was held by VW subsidiary Cariad. The location data was available for Volkswagen 460,000 vehicles in Amazon cloud. It was 300.000 cars in Germany, 80,000 in Norway, 70,000 in Sweden, 60,000 in the UK, 61,000 in the Netherlands, 50000 in France, etc

You can sign a petition against the change here : https://www.change.org/p/let-s-preserve-viollet-le-duc-s-sta...

What is so sad about this is the windows don't need to be replaced. Original windows hold significant value. While modern replacements typically need replacement within 20-30 years, historic wooden windows can last centuries with proper maintenance. The craftsmanship in older windows often surpasses modern alternatives, making restoration a worthwhile investment for both historical accuracy and longevity.

I restored 189 windows in my 200-year-old house in Poland rather than replacing them. The windows are fundamental to a building's character and historical authenticity. You can date a building by analyzing its window features. The older the house, the fewer and smaller the windows, often due to glass manufacturing limitations and structural needs. For instance, a 16th-century manor might have small, thick-glassed windows with irregular panes, while an 18th-century townhouse would show taller, multi-paned sash windows.

It goes back to the old wisdom DIKW pyramid.

EDITED My ASCI art pyramid did not work. So imagine a pyramid with DATA at the bottom, INFORMATION on top of the data, and KNOWLEDGE sitting on top of the INFORMATION, with WISDOM at the top.

And then trying top guess where AI is? Some people say that Information is the knowing, what, knowledge the how, and Wisdom the why.

A Call to expertise is actually a fallacy. This is because experts can be wrong.

The scientific method relies on evidence and reproducible results, not authority alone.

Edited to add a reference: see under Appeal to authority. https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/fallacies/