It's the people driving the tractors who take jobs, not the ones building them. If you operate a hand-plough for a living when tractors come on the scene, you'd better learn how to drive a tractor. The same is true of AI.
Is it stupid? Because people are railing against the AI, not the system of evaluating worth and distributing wealth that implies that the advent of a miraculous labor-saving technology should be met with fear, not excitement about expansion of the capabilities of every human being.
I think this is right on. AI would be an amazing if it didn't mean that some people will have an even harder time making ends meet. Why does every technological innovation that improves productivity end up shifting even more resources to those at the top of the ladder?
The factory worker bemoans his station as the new automated smelter they're going to install may run him out of a job. Before he goes upstairs to commiserate with his spouse, he throws his dirty clothes in the washer, nary a care paid to the previous generation's neighbor children who used to make all their money washing other family's clothes for them.
(Probably not too much thought should be paid to the fact that when that economic system collapsed, we instituted allowances for children).
Tractors and policy favoring bigger scale agricultural production.
The US is profoundly inefficient at utilizing land for agriculture. The “miracle of the desert” and emptying a giant, un-renewable aquifer has been carrying us for decades. In my lifetime, we’ll be relying on small garden plots just like the Soviets did for vegetables.
To make this event type completely reproducible and measurable to the millisecond there could be a new cube product which uses LEDs to show the colors of a randomly scrambled cube and start the clock at the same moment too, while the solver is holding it. Clock stops the moment the cube is solved.
Do you really think that the couple hours it saves by having these maps to hand instead of a terrorist going to the station and making their own map of the public space is going to mean the difference between an attack and no attack? Get real. Let’s just get rid of all maps then hmm? Security risk.
While I don’t agree with the sentiment that it’s irresponsible to publish these maps, I don’t think you should underestimate how lazy the average person is, including terrorists. It often baffles me how utterly ineffective most terrorists are (which I guess , among other things, comes down to “bad”/lazy planning), only managing to kill maybe a handful of people, if even that.
Most people wouldn’t be very interested in being so nerdy as to map out the London Underground. Why would most terrorists be any different?
No, but it could make the difference between a poor attack and a very effective attack. The point being that subways are particularly vulnerable points.
Do you think that all maps and other forms of architectural or engineering schemas should be widely publicised, without individual regard to their potential for exploit?
When I was a kid my parents had a big physical encyclopaedia set. I used to lose myself in those things just as much as I scroll through stuff now. Just because in both instances, it’s “interesting”.
But my brain doesn’t necessarily discern between “good” interesting and “bad” interesting without me trying to work it out and guiding it.
Of course there's a lot of HN bitterness here. But I like Fig. I've been running my own heavily customised .zshrc for about a decade with loads of bells and whistles in terms of autocomplete and customised prompts and what not and it has been great and I've kept it current with cool new toys.
But I've dumped most of it in the last month for Fig. I like seeing command specific options, relevant to the current context, and in a long list which I can scan and scroll quickly.
I go to documentation MUCH less now and I'm faster with it. And that's most of what I care about.
Learn the tools, stay away from the toys. Hundreds of developers have been incredibly productive with a regular shell - there isn't any practical need for a product like Fig. If it were me and I was seeking more productivity from my shell, I would dive into books into how to improve it for myself rather than hook myself to another tool.
If I was seeking to be more productive I would probably install a tool like Fig and be done with it rather than spend time diving into the books to customize my shell. I think a lot of people in this thread are overlooking the simplicity of installing it and having it "just work" versus spending time fiddling with zsh configs.
I didn’t have fig just work. Actually I realized it made assumptions about the way my bashrc and bash_profile worked that broke the installation of fig and my shell configuration after I made some seemingly unrelated edits to my bash config.
It’s been broken for months and I didn’t get enough value out of it to figure out how to fix the installation.
If the business model for this was:
1) fully open source
2) ~$2.99 per user per month
3) more for team features
4) paid plugins and themes
5) opt-in and inspectable telemetry
They’d probably get their million paying users in the first year.
For this crucial part of this target market’s (engineers) toolkit, it HAS to A) be open source and B) have the option for zero telemetry.
Inb4: “if it was open source why would people pay for it?!?”
Because at the right price people are happy to pay and support something they love and get low-effort trustworthy updates built in.
Thanks for writing your thoughts! I can understand the skepticism and ultimately this is not far from the business we want to build.
The terminal is totally free for individuals and our business model is to make the terminal so useful for individuals that their companies will want to pay for the team features.
We are also definitely open-sourcing parts and potentially all of the code.
One thing you can generally be sure about, no matter what changes they go through: They won't ruin their own services and income-streams. Removing cookies? They have replacement for that in their browser that no extensions will be able to help with. Removing sign-in methods? Within their ecosystem they pass whatever token they want, wherever they want.
Not really. You just need to use the apps specific pw that you can obtain from your account security page. I just did this for a bunch of Gmail accounts that have aliases setup to send out from custom domain email address.
The only change is that you have to enable 2fa to obtain an app specific pw that you then use to setup the alias or to log in into your google mail via the less secure app of your choice.
Note that there is no need for a phone number to setup 2fa as you can instead use the option of one time login codes and then validate access from your phone using any google app such as the gmail.
UHK. Warning though, once you start you can’t go back. It presents to the machine as a mouse on holding the mouse key. I take my hands off the keyboard to use the mouse 80% less now. No it’s not the same as janky Mac OS mouse keys.
