With distributed systems I'd say network unreliability introduces a good amount of unpredictability. Whether that's comparable to what traditional engineering disciplines see, I couldn't say. Some types of embedded programming, especially those deployed out in the field, might also need to account for non-favorable conditions. But the predictability argument is interesting nonetheless.
> The primary reason people buy Expressive Animator is its high quality
You keep talking past people.
The feedback they're sharing is very simple. It's not super clear from your sales copy if my purchase gets me access to all updates forever, or if those are limited to the current major version. The way you're intending it to work is simple, yes, but your sales copy doesn't reflect that.
It seems like an easily solvable problem, tweak your sales copy to clarify, but instead you keep digging your heels. Fine, it's your company. I'm not a lawyer, but generally I'd be worried about making a bunch of sales if its not clear to my customers what exactly their buying. I don't get why you'd take such a chance when the fix is so simple, but again, it's your company.
The background is not solid black. There is a very subtle background image that is most visible on the top right corner. The contrast is so low though that it's very hard to see.
Self promotion is fine, but you've plugged the company you work for four times on this thread already. It's also appreciated when you add a disclaimer like you've done in the past [0]
Almost everything that is happening in US politics was telegraphed beforehand if you were looking carefully enough. If Musk's current level of influence and his actions are a surprise to anyone, I'd politely suggest that they augment their sources of information.
> if Musk frees up a significant fraction of the budget?
Freeing up money is not actually that hard. Doing it in a constructive way is a lot more difficult. I could go in and completely defund roads, airports, social security, public schools, the courts, the military, and save a ton of money.
Then what. What's the big plan? What are we going to do with all this money that will give us a better ROI?
That money was paying for stuff. Some stuff runs smoothly we enough that we take it for granted. Is everything perfect? No, but I'd like to see a little more care when screwing around with important infrastructure and services.
This reminds me of people that join a legacy software project and start proposing that you do a completely rewrite of the system without really understanding why certain decisions were made. It's almost always a total disaster and then someone else needs to come up and clean up after them.
I'll echo what other comments have stated, which is that my problem with AI slop is not just the quality but also the subtle deceit of presenting something that a computer generated as something you created. We all learned in grade school that plagiarism is bad, yet that norm seems to be thrown out the window because what AI generates didn't exist before. It's still not your work. You could argue that crafting the prompt meets the definition of authoring the work, with AI tools augmenting that into something fuller. I guess that's open to interpretation, but I don't find that a very convincing argument. It's easy to craft a prompt that is completely devoid of any real contributions.
I don't mind AI generated content. Just don't try to pass it off as your own. Like, if it's really that harmless then why would someone object to identifying it as AI generated. The fact that not everyone does tells me they're trying to deceive. Some of us object to that, and frankly I don't understand why anyone would be ok with it.
> Generally, it seems to me that a lot of people are saying, basically, "I don't want to engage in a social network that isn't and echo chamber of my beliefs."
The issue with Twitter and a lot of social media is that you don't often encounter opposing views that are nuanced, thoughtful and constructive, but rather hot takes, rants and memes. Even when those share your same worldview they can be tiring, but when they don't, they can drain your mental energy quickly.
Perhaps people do want to live in their own bubble, but I wouldn't say we can judge that based on Twitter just because of how toxic it can be.
I found Twitter to be much better on that front pre-Elon, but the changes he introduced have really incentivized and highlighted the hot takes, rants, and memes. Twitter used to be the kind of place where I could see an interesting comment and then look at the replies to see more interesting comments and maybe a new person to follow. In post-Elon Twitter, replies are inevitably a complete cesspool of boosted blue checks farming engagement or bots. It certainly wasn't perfect before, but it's absolutely become more toxic since Elon purchased it.
I'm not sure why people can't be humble enough to accept that we don't really know what the future will hold. Just because people have underestimated some new technology in the past doesn't mean that will continue to be true for all new technologies.
The fact that LLMs currently do not really understand the answers they're giving you is a pretty significant limitation they have. It doesn't make them useless, but it means they're not as useful at a lot of tasks that people think they can handle. And that limitation is also fundamental to how LLMs work. Can that be overcome? Maybe. There's certainly a ton of money behind it and a lot of smart people are working on it. But is it guaranteed?
Perhaps I'm wrong and we already know that it's simply a matter of time. I'd love to read an technical explanation for why that is, but I mostly see people rolling their eyes at us mere mortals who don't see how this will obviously change everything as if we're too small minded to understand what's going on.
To be extra clear, I'm not saying LLMs won't be a technological innovation as seismic as the invention of the car. My confusion is why for some there doesn't seem to be room for doubt.
in the current state they are already plenty useful, I don't think it's worth proving mathematically that something can work 100% of the times when 80% is good enough.
Apologies for the very off-topic reply, but I can't help but find it a little funny that on a thread exalting a particular tool, the top comment at the time of this writing is a link to another, newer tool. Not that there's anything wrong with sharing the link, but it does seem like here at HN we have a bit of a grass-is-greener thing going on. I would understand it more if the discussion was around how bad a tool is and someone chimed in with an alternative. And it's not like I don't want people to share these other projects but personally on a thread about a particular topic, the comments I find the most useful are those from people with experience in that topic sharing their opinions, tips, etc. In this case, the comment our community found the most valuable on the topic of Dokku seems to be a link to Dokploy, a project that judging by the commit history is new as of this past April.
I find it helpful to have other tools listed. I already know a decent amount about Dokku and clicked on these comments specifically to find out what other tools might be up and coming or otherwise mentioned in the space.
I'm still waiting for something built on a rootless container solution and with everything defined in git (i.e. no or limited cli commands) so that exactly what is being deployed is, at all times, tracked in git.
> it does seem like here at HN we have a bit of a grass-is-greener thing
Since it's Hacker News, not Old-But-Stable-Project-News, that seems expected? The other way it also happens, and has been happening forever, I published a new OSS project of mine ~10 years ago, went to the front-page, and 8 of 10 comments were recommending other pre-existing tools.
I think I was respectful enough to word the original comment I made to the difference between Dokploy & Dokku, not just saying one is better than the other. I've used both successfully and think both are great products - just wanted to share my experience. There seems to be an umbrella recently of self-hosting tools like Coolify/Dokku/Dokploy etc. so wanted to contribute to the discussion in that way. Dokploy is also an open-source project so thought the exposure might be positive on a high ranking HN post.
My comment came out crankier than I intended. I do think comments like yours are valuable, and I agree that you were respectful and informative. I'm just genuinely amused that the top comment is for a completely different tool. That's more an observation about how we vote as a community, not about your post. I include myself in that group though as I have in the past been drawn to the new and shiny over the already known.
Same here. Actually I regularly revisit threads about Dokku, Coolify and CapRover because I know that there are references to other projects that I might have missed.
I personally appreciate it - I really like going to the comments to see other approaches and alternatives whenever something is on here. I don't think it's an insult nor do I think it's out of place if done correctly. HN is one of the only places left on the internet where I expect good value in the comments section and this is one of the reasons.
My theory for this, at least in this case when the featured article is about a software program, aka a tool, then it really becomes a discussion about the tools that serve the purpose of that in TFA.
Here's an analogy from the physical realm: "presenting shovel, a customizable tool for removing dirt".
- doesn't work well for rocky terrain, but I'm working on DigBar, which can outperform Shovel in many high performance workloads.
- it's a lot slower than Hoe, if you're only going down 4" of topsoil
- I wrote a custom frontend for Shovel call Flatend, it carries more volume for loose loads
- theres a paid product called posthole that is worth buying if you build fences, uses shovel under GPLv3
