This looks like another AI project. The HN user is new, the GitHub user is 4 days old, and all the content in the GitHub repo is authored by someone else. There's a blog repo with one commit containing 29 pre-written posts. A third repo 'nexusai-landing' is the only repo where 'denisepattenson' has committed anything.
Yeah, I second this. Like other comments have mentioned, you'd expect a human to add a video to such a post. I wonder what urged this robot to post this to HN.
The other code author is a "Dr. Josh C. Simmons" whose GitHub profile leads with "Building AI systems and influence architecture at scale." and "Founder @ Meridian Strategic Systems — Running experiments in cognitive systems, behavioral modeling, and automated influence generation."
So, my guess is that this a prototype of whatever Meridian is going to be doing.
I haven't really looked but I wonder if there are any IP reputation services tracking AI crawlers the same way they track tor relays and vpns and such. If those databases were accurate it seems like you could prevent those crawlers from ever hitting the site. Maybe they change too often/too quickly.
It's just really grating to buy a nice screen and then have all the streaming services basically lock you to early-2000s picture quality. It's not that it doesn't work at all, but if I get the big nice modern screen I want to be able to use what I paid for.
The opaque covers (and essentially all license plate decorations, frames, covers, etc.) are illegal as of October 1 in Florida. I believe initially the plan is stop-and-educate, but the law provides for a $500 fine and up to 60 days jail time for obscuring your license plate.
It is weird to me that we got to a point where we are being literal about the law again, instead of the spirit.
I guess laws should no longer say:
A license plate should be attached to a car.
Instead it should say:
All vehicles that don't display their license plate for cameras of any kind are illegal, the spirit of this law is to make it so we can identify through the number assigned to the vehicle from the state that identifies it is obvious if a picture is taken of the vehicle from the front or the back.
Better yet, judges and legal experts should just stop playing these games with words and figure out a new way to make things that are supposed to be legal, legal.
> It is weird to me that we got to a point where we are being literal about the law again, instead of the spirit.
The "spirit" of any law requiring license plates on vehicles is that the license plate can be read under normal conditions. The letter of the law may have been more generic, although many countries define very precisely everything about the plate, its condition and legibility. So demanding visible plates is exactly in the spirit of the law. What's the point of a license plate that nobody can read?
People exploited the letter of the law by having a license that was illegible somehow. Covered, faded writing, flipped under the motorcycle seat, etc.
> vehicles that don't display their license plate for cameras of any kind are illegal
License plates predate traffic cameras and the requirement for readable plates has been in force in many countries since for almost all that time. The license needs to be visible first and foremost so humans can easily identify a car. It can be police or a witness when someone runs you over.
Cameras automate this so they make abuse far easier. But the need was always there for various legitimate reasons.
Almost no law would survive if everyone was allowed to just take some literal interpretation of their own choice. The attitude that "well technically the law says" is usually shot down by any judge for good reason. Someone could have a lot of fun with your right to "bear arms".
License plates have always been required to be legible; that's the whole point. Obscuring them is clearly against the spirit of the law, whether or not that particular method is specifically codified.
> All vehicles that don't display their license plate for cameras of any kind are illegal, the spirit of this law is to make it so we can identify through the number assigned to the vehicle from the state that identifies it is obvious if a picture is taken of the vehicle from the front or the back.
Quarter inch high license plates are now legal. It’s hardly the motorist’s fault if the camera is too low resolution :)
Regular license plates are illegal, because they’re unreadable to a type of camera - thermal cameras :)
I'm not really disagreeing with you, but I think it's more about salesmanship than anything else. "We released v1 and copyright holders immediately threatened to sue us, lol" sounds like you didn't think ahead, and also paints copyright holders in a negative light; copyright holders who you need to not be enemies but who, if you're not making it up, are already unhappy enough to want to sue you.
Sam's sentence tries to paint what happened in a positive light, and imagines positive progress as both sides work towards 'yes'.
So I agree that it would be nice if he were more direct, but if he's even capable of that it would be 30 years from now when someone's asking him to reminisce, not mid-hustle. And I'd add that I think this is true of all business executives, it's not necessarily a Silicon Valley thing. They seem to frequently be mealy-mouthed. I think it goes with the position.
"The best tools shouldn't only be accessible to the pros" but his knife costs more than every knife in that database.
The weight is listed in their help articles as 330g. I also think that handle is chunkier than a typical high end chef's knife. It may be easier to cut things with it, but I think your hand and arm are going to get tired of using it more quickly than with a regular knife at ~100g less.
And I realize these fare worse than the high end japanese and german knives, but it's hard to get excited about a $400 knife you can't put in the dishwasher when you can get a perfectly credible fibrox knife for about a tenth of that, which doesn't require charging and can tolerate 'careless home cook' levels of abuse.
You're supposed to keep a glass of water with a bit of chlorine bleach (to obtain roughly 300 ppm) handy for wiping your tools and surfaces down as you work. Not that anyone teaches Home Economics at school any longer.
This is what I learned in cooking school but also never actually saw in practice in restaurants I worked in (which were fine-ish dining in the Bay Area).
Taking a piece of metal or a plate that has any oily or other non-water-soluble food on it, rinsing it, and chlorinating it results in a mess that might indeed be non-infectious but is otherwise disgusting. Also, leaving a piece of stainless steel covered in chloride (which that bleach will turn into) is one of the worst things you could credibly do to it in a kitchen context. (And, while the relevant regulators don’t seem to care about disinfection byproducts in a kitchen, all those residual organics that didn’t get removed plus hypochlorous acid seem like they would thoroughly fail most drinking water standards.)
Also, I don’t know what all the food safety and dishwasher vendors are telling their customers, but that nice residual chlorine has a tasty and odor that is not appetizing at all. But you can also legally disinfect your dishes and such with sufficiently hot water, and you can buy a commercial dishwasher that does that instead of using chlorine.
In a home context, what’s wrong with dish soap and a sponge or brush? In a commercial kitchen that really wants to be compliant could use dish soap followed by a (very) hot rinse. The average household instant hot water tap is plenty hot for this, too, although demonstrably hitting those HACCP targets might be tricky.
I'm not disputing that, and it's kind of my point. Most home cooks (I would bet millions) are not worrying about "the cutting experience" when they are making dinner. They are using a knife to cut up vegetables or slice meat or whatever. Then they are putting that knife in the dishwasher. Not all of them, but most.
I think my other points matter more. I think people who are invested in the experience as you suggest care about more than just the edge and finish, they care about the weight and balance and feel as well. I think this knife is probably worse on those qualities.
I don't mean to say this knife sucks or that this guy is dumb. It's a cool knife, and he's clearly not dumb. I just think this is more a passion project curiosity kind of thing than a useful product addressing a large market need. Maybe a future mass market version (cheaper steel, stamped, more contoured handle) would change my mind.
> Most home cooks (I would bet millions) are not worrying about "the cutting experience"
Indeed, and they won't buy the knife at this price anyway. My point is that not being dishwasher-safe does not matter for ~everyone. If they care, they won't do it; if they don't, they won't buy it.
It's hard to do irreparable damage to the steel of a knife. It's just an inert lump of metal. But you could fuck up the handle. Theoretically, the detergent could dull your edge. If you don't isolate your knife and it rattles around, that'll definitely dull it. Mostly: it should only take a couple seconds to clean off your knife in the sink.
> It's hard to do irreparable damage to the steel of a knife.
It’s easy — just heat it above the tempering temperature of the steel in question. You can achieve this in an ordinary oven for most steels, and you can also achieve it (locally) with a motorized sharpener that isn’t cooled. Don’t take a knife you care about to be professionally sharpened by a person who uses a non-water-cooled power tool.
> It's hard to do irreparable damage to the steel of a knife.
Sadly not impossible, I've 'lost' (they're still in the back of a drawer) two good knives to idiots attempting to pry apart frozen chops and steaks .. each case snapped a good inch from the tip.
Not damage from a dishwasher and not damage the edge I realize, but worth mention as a tale of caution.
The steel used to make the knives is not always stainless, so it can stain or rust. Even stainless is really just stain resistant.
Dishwasher detergent is caustic and corrosive to steel, so over time it can pit the metal and dull the finish. Handles will swell and become loose or deteriorate, either because of wood repeatedly being waterlogged and dried or just from the heat cycling. A loose handle can be unsanitary, unsightly, dangerous, or all three.
You'll often read that knives in the dishwasher will bang around and that will damage the edge. And that it's more likely you will hurt yourself pulling a knife out of the dishwasher vs. cleaning them properly.
Phosphoric acid detergents will pit your blade. If the knife is not a stainless steel, the wash and dry cycle will cause accelerated rusting. In wooden-handled knives with a rat tail tang construction, you can start destroying the handle from the inside out due to gaps in the construction allowing water seepage and degradation. In non-stainless knives, that same construction becomes the point where rust tends to build up.
Then you also have the action of the dishwasher water jets bouncing the knife around, dulling and destroying the edge.
Only the shittiest cheapest plastic-handled knives I own touch the dishwasher. Everything else gets cleaned and wiped by hand and put straight to the knife block or its respective scabbard.
I think the answer to your question is that most people impacted to the severe degree you're imagining don't live till 70.
I don't know what the condition was, but I had an aunt who was affected by 'something' and was disabled in many of the same ways you imagine; she was nonverbal and needed full time care from a young age. She lived to 43, and towards the end they had to put in a feeding tube for her.
I have a couple of questions for you:
1. Have you ever personally seen a 'severe case' of autism where someone needs full time care for their entire life? Where are you getting your information about the degree and prevalence of this?
2. Putting "cases are clearly on the rise" alongside "where are the 70 year old severely autistic people" implies that you (via RFK Jr.) think that the number of severe cases is on the rise, not just that more people are being diagnosed with some level of autism. Do you know severe cases are on the rise, or are you (or RFK Jr.) just making some assumptions?
The reason I ask #2 is that the 'severe autism' we're imagining in this narrative would be, as you point out, obvious. But what if our understanding of symptoms has gotten better, and we're diagnosing more not-obvious cases, i.e. not severe cases.
Please keep in mind that the first person officially diagnosed with autism only died a couple of years ago. Donald Triplett. He lived to be 89, by the way.
reply