It seems like there are about four different options
- Leave it unlocked all the time, even if you’re gone for a while
- Leave it unlocked all the time, except for when you leave the house for more than a few minutes
- Leave it unlocked when you’re home and locked when you’re not home (Maybe another option here for locking when you’re sleeping?)
- Leave it locked all the time
Personally I default to the latter because that’s how my idiosyncratic anxiety feels comfortable, even when I’ve lived somewhere where I would be able to hear people coming a mile off. But I know people who default to the first option even in a place where some of their neighbors default to the latter. A lot of it comes down to personal preference rather than environment, I suspect.
Many single family homes in Germany (and apartments) don't even have a doorknob outside you can turn - you can only open the door with a key (from the outside).
I guess in rural areas and old style homes it might be different.
Here in the UK, my mother locks her front door at night, even though she's in a relatively low-crime area (albeit, technically a 'city'). When I stay, it scares the life out of me; I worry about waking up to a fire and being stuck in the house!
Ah, very interesting. Many modern codes prohibit this for this exact reason. For example, in North America any residential door will have a thumb lever or other means of unlatching from the inside without a key.
Of note, just today Jagex released a plugin interface for Runescape 3 which was developed together with developers from the Runelite team and the existing Runescape 3 third-party plugin tool (Alt-1). The relationship seems pretty friendly right now.
It’s a very small set of buyers that are in that price range. Total annual domestic box office revenue is like $10 billion, maybe $50 billion for global TV and film. And that’s revenue, not profit, and a lot of costs are going to marketing, not to filming and casting. That’s a lot of money, but it’s not the scale that OpenAI and Anthropic are at.
Video generation would only make sense at that scale if it was targeting individual consumers, but then it’d need to cost something that consumers are willing to pay - which practically is probably a few hundred per year at most among US consumers, and much less globally, so again it doesn’t solve for the size of the AI companies.
I don’t see a way that video generation becomes a big industry without making generation much much cheaper.
Aren't these two largely separate questions? Viability versus if a given incumbent has interest in a market of a given size. With the combination of (at minimum) streaming platforms, the box office, and advertisements video and audio generation would be viable at a remarkably high price point (as compared to the current token prices for other sorts of things). And as the price comes down presumably the market would grow larger - by how much I have no idea but there are certainly a great deal of currently underserved niche markets.
I think the idea that people are willing to consume an even more slopful Netflix is dubious.
There's has already been a decade of complaints about trash content in excess of available viewing hours.
The thing with media consumption is that there exist a finite number of eyeball-hours available, and it's a zero sum game against other non-media consumers.
You’re unfortunately vastly overrating the world before Ikea. I have the furniture passed down from the 70s and 80s and it’s all falling apart and made from plywood.
You have to go back to the 30s and earlier before you get furniture that will stand up like that, and making that furniture new today would cost more than almost anyone could afford.
And the only 30's - 60's furniture that survives will be mostly solid cabinets; they are neither in style (if you care) anymore, but more importantly they're no longer practical, as they were built for different lifestyles and - habits. Writing desks are cute in theory but nobody sits down to write letters anymore.
You are correct, I used Ikea as a generic name for cheap plywood stuff. But there was still strong furniture being built in that era, it didn't all stop in the 1930s, if anything, because a portion of the population even in the global north had not converted to a "modern" post-WWII lifestyle as we see in the movies.
Engineers are expensive, especially good system engineers who are trained in your code base. Very possible that this just hadn't gotten to the top of the priority list.
I don't understand why you need training on your code base to design a cache format for read only vs rw workloads, but anyway yours is a comment about neglect, not the "evil" that would happen if you did that design
I see your point but disagree. Engineering is about constraints. Time, materials, labor, scope.
The “evil” of premature optimization is that it’s a misapplication of priority. If I have an acute medical problem that needs attention, it’s not the right time to talk about chloresterol and statins, get my broken leg set.
There’s always a tension between engineering management who needs to deliver a solution to the business and engineers who want to deliver a beautiful object.
> I don't understand why you need training on your code base to design a cache format
Because anyone willing to come in just to design your cache format is going to expect payment that is many multiples more than the engineers you already cannot afford? Long-term employees cost less, which brings them closer to being affordable, but you have to be able to keep them busy for long periods of time to realize that reduction in cost. A engineer who doesn't understand your codebase isn't going to be useful for very long.
At the gas stations near me, at the start of 2025, I could get a gallon of gas for around $1.85. The stations near me are now up to around $4.30, a 250% increase. I don't know if I'd quite call it a crisis, but certainly it's a major shock.
In many areas, this is left up to the parents - minors can't buy alcohol at stores, but parents are legally allowed to give alcohol to their children to drink.
I think the distinction the comment is drawing is about the legality of it not the practical feasibility .
It would be illegal under the currently proposed
/implemented laws and also open up social media to liability, which wouldn’t be true for other products like Alcohol or fire arms that require minimum age to buy but not give to children
Of course, sometimes simpler is “I stored the passwords unhashed”, so you have to find the middle ground.
reply