This is a bizarre complaint. There's plenty to complain about with regards to you know, normalizing kids consuming AI content, giving a gift from a slop machine instead of something hand-made, etc. But come on. The game itself is insanely impressive for something generated in one prompt from a bunch of doodles (cool doodles, but still!) If a single human hobbyist dev created this in a few days we wouldn't call it "kind of embarrassing".
If a human gamedev made this in a few days (pre-AI / assuming the AI slop artstyle didn't exist), and you think that the only reason people wouldn't call it embarrassing is to avoid hurting their feelings, you either have a vastly inflated idea of the average person's abilities or you're deluding yourself. Be real man.
> large equipment (combines, sprayer booms, center pivot irrigation systems[1], etc)
Something I've always absent-mindedly wondered about when agrivoltaics comes up is integrating a gantry/rail system of sorts for the farm equipment. It's definitely infeasible for many reasons, but it's fun to think about. Instead of equipment pulled by tractors, have the equipment ride above the field on rails, held up by the same poles the solar panels are on.
I'm honestly not even sure what a good use case is for a Raspberry Pi proper at this point. It sits somewhat awkwardly between things that microcontrollers can handle(*) and things that, as you mentioned, NUCs or old computers or used laptops (or even used phones!) with removed batteries can handle.
*: I am so glad we're finally out of the phase where people were using Pis for hobbyist tasks where an Arduino would have worked just fine. Especially now that there are so many cheap, accessible microcontrollers. ESP32s obviously, but Raspberry's own RP2040/RP2350 have been more useful to me than the Pis themselves ever were.
My two Pi 3B+ are my TVs. They have a TV hat which decodes DVB 2 and tvheadend which streams channels. Then I use the Android clients on my phone and tablets over 5 GHz Wi-Fi to look at free to air channels. The clients do the channel selection part, then I watch the streams with VLC. I think that I could vibe code a simple web UI (tvheadend web UI is not simple)
In this way I have a TV that follows me around my house. I'm not stuck in a place to watch it. It's mostly for news and sports. Movies, YouTube etc are on phone and tablets anyway. A better smart TV mostly on my own terms.
I've been buying new-in-box Pi 3Bs to run snapcast speakers around my house and host various sensors and physical switches. Honestly they're probably overkill, and I'm not even using GPIO.
> Hi Josh, saw your HN comment about [thing you said]. [Compliment.] I’m curious, [open-ended question]?
Why does every sales email talk like this? It doesn't seem like LLM accent, or maybe it's just a different LLM accent from the "programmer" one. It's just funny how instantly recognizable this is as a fake-chummy sales email even despite the brackets.
To me that sounds exactly like one of the free tier ChatGPT personalities I've encountered when asking random questions about non-work stuff. It's always a reference to something in my message, often calling it the most important part or something. Waxing poetic about how insightful it is. Then "I'm curious" or "The thing I want to know" followed by some random uninteresting follow-up question.
I'm surprised how much everyone's opinions differ in this thread. I've always found blender's UI incredible but inkscape's awful (though nowhere near as bad as gimp)
> Some generic SaaS company or tiny startup, yes, engineers should have root access to stuff.
Why? Setting up proper CI/CD is a 5 minute task. If you're worried about sharing keys with 3rd parties the pipeline can be self-hosted. There's no need for credentials to live on engineers' machines.
They are building them in the middle of nowhere. I've looked up sites for data center projects before and it'll literally be in some empty field far away from any homes, and people will still complain as if they're flattening a neighborhood. It's a little ridiculous.
That said, I agree they should put them in Canada and similar regions, it seems like a no brainer resources-wise for the reasons you mentioned. The reason they don't is probably that it's vastly more expensive to work on remote sites like that. Mines and dams do it by necessity, but it's a big undertaking to build stuff a full day's drive (or bush plane flight) from the nearest city.
They’re trying to build one in the middle of nowhere about 30 miles outside my city.
But they also want to build an on premise 1000MW natural gas power plant and a 500MW biomass plant that will take millions of acres of forest to sustain.
Which is dumb, but the obvious thing to do is campaign to block the massively polluting power plant part of it, not the building with computers in it. As the GP said, these companies have insane market caps, they can afford to build renewable power.
It feels like at some point our society forgot that the government is supposed to pass laws, and not just block things we don't like. Data centers are being built with polluting power sources, why is the instinct "stop all the data centers" and not simply, you know, require them to not use polluting power sources?
Also, while I'm glad you're focused on what matters, 90% of the outcry I've heard about DCs is about water. Or noise pollution, or them looking ugly... for buildings that, again, are mostly being built on razed industrial land or empty fields. According to the OP, "electrical grid" is the fifth most common concern, and air pollution is wayy down the list.
I've slowly been coming around to this viewpoint as well. It's interesting that there's so much focus on using AI to write code (which, don't get me wrong, does work well but makes you lose track of what you're building so quickly) and seemingly less on analyzing code, finding bugs, etc
I wouldn't say it's "interesting", rather that it's a natural result of incentive structures. If the AI labs try to sell their product as being good at finding bugs, then their expected valuation is the entire market cap of the existing static analysis industry, which is not very high. If they instead sell their product as being good at writing software, then their expected valuation is the "market cap" of the code-writing industry, a.k.a. the total spent on software development labor, which is very high. It doesn't matter what's true, only what promises to make them the most money.
The planning, which can also be done in concert with AI, before getting the AI to write the code helps with not losing track of what you're building. In my current workflow, I never tell AI to just code X, I always approach it in such a way to leave space for research and breaking it up into multiple units of work (tickets) if the scope of the feature or idea calls for it.
Many in tech would say that, and sure we'd be better off if even more did, but on some level it doesn't matter. In a sufficiently large country you'll always find someone willing to Be Evil, especially if they're paid well. We can't rely on every single capable company deciding not to take a given government contract, this sort of thing has to be solved via the political and legal system
But the more dominant the "legal because computer, and how dare you ask me?" attitude is, the less we'll see enforcement. People should demand action, rather than call it a clever business plan.
Folks who were on here praising Uber or Airbnb for skirting the law 10 years ago, this was part of the problem.
Honestly, I would argue Uber advocates had a valid point. Taxi medallion laws were created to artificially screw with the market by limiting supply of taxi cabs to far below a reasonable number that would’ve been on the road otherwise. This was 100% to the benefit of the taxicab industry and came at the expense of people who wanted to ride in cabs.
I do have some sympathy for the cab drivers who used to be able to earn a better living, but the only reason that was possible is that city government gave them a sweetheart deal, which isn’t fair. It makes exactly as much sense as having barber medallions or pharmacist medallions. If they had those, it might cost $85 for a basic haircut, and pharmacist and barber medallion owners might make a ton of money (remember, you can rent out medallions, so they became investment vehicles), but those are prices we’d all be paying for.
Regulations that just pick winners and losers, making most of us the losers, are stupid - and should be loopholed-around if it’s possible.
>Taxi medallion laws were created to artificially screw with the market
My area had no taxi medallion laws or system.
That's part of the problem. The excuses were always bullshit made up from generalizations of local problems. Uber wasn't needed to "Bust the taxi monopoly" because in most places there was no taxi monopoly, at least, not until Uber showed up and made one.
The excuse was never meant to be actually valid though. It was always just a simple "gotcha" that could be employed as a thought terminating cliche by people who had already made up their mind on which outcome they wanted.
This is a valid point, but doesn’t it seem like it is tremendously easier to get a ride somewhere in some random suburban area or even a semi-rural area? New York or San Francisco had plenty of people who would’ve been willing to drive cabs who couldn’t afford a medallion[1] but it seems like in less urban areas what was lacking was just the exact product Uber provides: a dispatching system that connects people who need rides with people who are willing to drive, without requiring those drivers to paint their cars yellow and incorporate their own formal business. It lowered barriers on both sides of their marketplace, especially on the driver side, since it was no risk to become a driver - if you never got any rides, you hadn’t really invested anything.
Anyway, isn’t that a good thing for those areas? I think a lot of people just didn’t have any convenient way to get around besides walking or waiting an hour for a very infrequent bus.
[1] (I was going to say “couldn’t get a medallion,” but since they were rentable and thus served as investment vehicles, it’s really just a matter of not being willing to pay the price those things commanded on the market)
reply