Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more sz4kerto's commentslogin

> someone could get by on £150k if they had to

I know you're kinda joking, but it's just so HN :)


It's more than I make, and I own a house! The idea that someone could be a big football fan, but would refuse to take a job making less than the equivalent of that magic $250k a year seems like such a misalignment* of values. I agree that you see it a lot on HN, and elsewhere.

* (pun not intended, but sort of proud of it now)


Of all the ML/AI researchers I know (20+), none of them are football fans. I suppose it could happen but I have not seen it.


You must not know any Indian researchers then. Almost every one I know supports a football club


Huh, I do not. I guess most of the people I know in this space I knew prior to 2015 and the field was not as widely popular back then.


I wore their away kit for Halloween this year :D

But I suspect they're just like all the others -- looking for credentialling where it doesn't yet exist.

[Guess we'll find out... not holding my breath for what would be a dream for us both]


Exactly. LLMs make it worse for both the employers and the job seekers. Receiving hundreds of applications per day is extremely difficult to handle for a small company, especially that it's extremely apparent that around 1% reads the job description at all.


I'll sound like a grumpy old man, but: that's one of the big advantages of using Java. The ecosystem is _super stable_ if you go with the usual stack (Spring Boot, etc.), you generally get support for all the modern cloud stuff, and it breaks very rarely.


Good news for you: Rust is already quite mature and is mostly the same as Java in this regard. OP is exaggerating, if not misinforming.


Are you me? I'm a CTO too, and I feel _exactly_ like this.


My expectation is that:

1: people will use ChatGPT to write their formal emails based on a casually written text 2: people will use ChatGPT to convert their emails from formal text to summaries\ 3: this will get automated by email providers 4: eventually the automation will be removed and we'll just talk in plain language again


I do #1 and it's great. I'm not sure why folks in this thread are sneering at what is a working English transpiler. I don't get to choose having to write formally at work sometimes but I can control how I deal with it.


writing formally doesn't require using a lot of useless filler words though.


Prompt it to be concise, without filler words. It works well enough.


We're using tons of Hetzner nodes that are under constant heavy load (~100% CPU usage for ~12 hrs/day), never had problems. I know this is anecdotal, just logging it here.


"But what you must know is that WSL has a lot of problems when compared to a full Linux OS. Because WSL is basically a virtual machine of Linux running on Windows, it will be a lot slower and memory-consuming"

Wow, this is just so extremely wrong.


It has been true since WSL2.


UK has that (called the HSCN). I don't think it's a good thing. Couple of years ago you had to pay hundreds of dollars for a a TLS certificate because there were only a couple of 'approved' certificate providers. It also provides a false sense of security and provides an excuse to bad security policies. The bandwidth is low and expensive.


It’s not sure it’s quite the same, HSCN does provide border connectivity to Internet as well as a peering exchange. Sjunet on the other hand is an entirely private network with no border connectivity. I have dealt with both.


Whether an implementation is bad is orthogonal to whether the idea itself is good.


I don't agree fully. If some idea looks really good but implementations tend to be very problematic then the idea is likely presented incompletely or inaccurately, because it carries some hidden/non-apparent risk.

Some good-looking ideas almost always result in beneficial implementations, some good-looking ideas almost always result in bad implementations.


If all implementations of a "good" idea are bad then that's a strong indication that the "good" idea might have some significant flaws.

If the "good" idea has some bad implementations as well as some good implementations (like the swedish network example?) then perhaps you shouldn't dismiss the "good" idea so quickly


Sure, let's get to concrete things. What is a separate physical network worth, availability wise? Kind of hard to answer. It depends on the threat model. Even geography.


In this case though the two things are closely intertwined. The reason we all use the internet is because it is the most fit-for-purpose network for moving bits around between intranets. If there was a substantially more effective way to do it then it'd be cheaper or better and we'd all migrate to it over time. Countless businesses at all levels of the abstraction stack labour to make the internet cheaper and more convenient (CDNs are unbelievable, I say!).

So people choosing to create a new network are, with high confidence, going to end up with networks that are substantially worse at moving bits around cost effectively than the internet. The reality that they are inconvenient and expensive is built in once the deliberate choice is made to avoid the internet. It might be worth the cost, but the cost comes with the idea.


Not sure what you are even refering to. Could you be specific? Got examples in mind?


HSCN was said to be imperfect. It is inherent in the idea of building something like HSCN that sometimes the implementation is just bad in some aspects. actionfromafar's objection to that (idea independent from implementation) is invalid, because inherent in the idea of building something like HSCN rather than just using the internet is that implementations will suffer from relative imperfect. The fact there are relative imperfections is baked in to the idea.


[flagged]


Using Latin words isn’t a suitable substitute for critical thought. You aren’t applying any here. There’s a clear difference between these two scenarios. The argument with communism tends to hinge on the assertion that there’s been no good real-world implementation of communism. Here, OP is asserting that an implementation is good. That’s yet to be refuted based on the actual characteristics of the implantation. You’re at the very least being tone deaf.


> It also provides a false sense of security

The same argument was against seat belts in cars and bicycle/motorcycle hemlets. IMHO this arguments is rarely good. False sense of security should not be addressed by removing protection.

> provides an excuse to bad security policies

It should not be used as an excuse but bad policies in air-gaped network is less bad than bad policies in the Interned connected one. I doubt policies will be quickly improve as soon as you connect to the Internet.


> provides an excuse to bad security policies

That's a (highly predictable) implementation problem of HSCN, not a problem with the idea. These complaints boil down to the same old thing: stupidly written law setting a (potentially) good policy up for failure.


You never ever swap cables between PSUs. It's not a Dell thing - you must use the cables that ship with the PSU. Many people have fried their mainboard like you.


You're talking about something different. In the early 2000s, before modular PSU cables, Dell used non-standard PSU power connector wiring arrangements. The 20-pin mobo power plug coming out of the PSU was wired differently than the ATX standard at the time, and swapping hardware could fry a motherboard.

https://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=339053

Edit: Better source https://superuser.com/questions/905705/atx-dell-psu-to-offic...


Nvidia does something similar with their server GPU cards, to prevent people from using cheaper desktop GPUs in servers.


Yeah, I wasn't "swapping" PSU cables; the cable was part of the PSU. I replaced a Dell PSU with a standard one, and <smoke!> No more motherboard.

Manufacturers who pull this type of incompatibility shit risk their reputation. I never went near anything with a Dell label again until last year, when I bought a second-hand laptop (I don't attempt laptop upgrades and repairs).


We have decided not to use anything that can't run any any computer. It's really possible to have large scale systems ROAC, if you pay attention to avoid proprietary cloud tech lock-in.

(ROAC in our case means Runs on any Kubernetes)


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: