HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | FeloniousHam's commentslogin

Do you think The Market™ _won't_ mobilize in response to the price incentive?

Well, if there's a shortage as GP's 2022† article states, and the demand is 'actually' there, wouldn't the proverbial "Econ 101" response be a rise in prices? Has there been such a rise?

† I've seen articles from 2019 discussing the (alleged?) shortage.


I am tempted to just paste (the material parts of) what you wrote into Claude and see what it spits out...

Me too, but this is definitely one of those areas where the design is the important part.

Although telling claude to rewrite all of the gnu utils to output html is an appealing new capability.


I hope not, I use "full self driving" every day! I'm sure your statement is based extensive experience, but mine is that for 2 1/2 years over 40k miles, it has worked very well. Not perfect (parking spot selection has frequent regressions), but astonishingly well.


I wish it switch to (or at least behave like) "Sloth" in any <30mph zone. Sometimes I forget to switch as I'm driven through a neighborhood and it's not friendly to anyone walking their dog.


I look forward to the safe diversity provided by early stage socialism!


good on you


I only use their DataGrip product. Compared to the competition they are iterating at lightspeed.


> why in the hell do I need to trust some extension builder to give me an amazing UI/UX?

Because you're a "long tail case" tab user? Your case might be the poster boy for an active extension ecosystem that caters to niche needs.


I don't buy that. I would guess there are plenty of "joe/jane users" that are tab hoarding using horizontal tabs because they don't know better. Since Sidebery already built it, it would be reasonably easy for mozilla to implement a vertical tabs solution that matches its functionality and would seem innovative as hell to joe/jane. Instead, they decide to copy Apple's bad UI/UX.

Setting my browser up the way I did was a serious PITA and it didn't have to be.


> lack of social intelligence mixed with little self-confidence, both of which you can gain by being out-reaching and taking risks.

I live this. Even today, I have to make myself be social, I have to practice (my first job as a waiter was the best thing to happen to me).

The human engagement muscle atrophies when you indulge "introversion" (for all definitions and causes), and our age of infinite individual delights has tipped the tradeoff towards "alone and easy". I wish the sensitivity toward and acceptance of "neurodivergent" had more recognition that the way humans have been doing things for the last 15000 years might have had some value.


At least since the agricultural revolution (settling happened at various times depending on region, but we are talking thousands of years, up to 12k) up until a couple of hundred years ago most people lived in small communities of a few hundred people, where their great-great-grandparents also lived, huge extended family networks, regular festivities and behaviors tied to and strongly prescribed by farming work seasons and religious customs, semi-arranged marriages, job/land inherited from father to son.

There is nothing "natural" about living in some cramped city, meeting strangers all the time, trying to build connections and everybody leaving within 3-5 years to hundreds of miles away, navigating relationships online, working for big corporations with no stable coworkers, having to mingle with strangers all the time whose reputation, past etc you know nothing of etc.


The point the person above you is trying to make is that they lived in communities, in constant communication and contact with others. The idea of going home and hanging out by yourself is at least as unnatural as cities where you can still build a relatively stable community if you prioritize that sort of thing.


My point is that it was pretty much automatic and built in. It didn't require active effort, planning, etc. As we became less dependent on those around us and more dependent on large-scale systems of commerce and government, we are simply not forced as much. This is the same with having children and marrying. People "back then" did these things on autopilot, not as active choice. Today it requires active choice and deliberation and planning.


We previously were more accepting, eg, if you read the accounts of various socialites trying to include shy, reclusive, or eccentric friends in high society, you see real effort and concern to include them despite the difference in behavior.

We dropped all that social connection/obligation and associated support it provided for various people when we stopped doing things that historic way.

Talking about a thing to virtue signal is not the same as doing a thing.


ugh, capitalists...


...would that this (micro) evidence actually show that, and had any hope of practical scale without unintendeded consequences...


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

Search: