You accumulate web frameworks and maintainers similar to the winning strategy at Monopoly, until you have implicit control over entire ecosystems. Whether you actually seize that control or not doesn’t even matter, because you are in a position to do so—by strategic neglect, or increased attention to whatever project supports your current business goals best.
No single entity should have that much power, especially no venture-capital backed one.
If you haven’t yet, also take a look at VueUse. It’s essentially a library of very useful utility composables that come on handy very often, and make for astonishingly clean components.
Yes we can. Pirate the stuff, they try to block it? Use a seedbox.
Same goes for AI. This will accelerate options for private hosted AI. Which I guess will happen eventually anyway once cheap hardware gets to a state where you can run X model size at home for cheap.
As always its the people in the know that have the upper hand. The mass user base does not have this knowledge unfortunately. They might just stop using the service if no competitor steps up. We are seeing it with streaming cancellations.
Not making friends at work because you have fulfilled social life already, and not making friends at work to avoid any danger to your career are two very different things.
Not making friends at work, because it's not a good place to make friends, might push you towards ensuring having fulfilled social life outside of work.
I say this without rancor: unless I miss my mark, you don't live or work in the United States. You don't understand the stakes. I envy your life brother; I hope you appreciate it.
I live and work in Europe but I used to travel a lot for work to the US. Friendship or making friends indeed seems to work differently there, which was hard to grasp from my cultural pov. That said, I made a good friend there.
Does anyone work on smart glasses for blind people yet? Something with blackened glass, obviously, that uses image recognition to translate visual input into text via (headphone) audio to the wearer.
That would allow for urgent warnings (approaching a street, walking towards obstacle [say, an electric scooter or a fence]), scene descriptions on request, or help finding things in the view field. There's probably a lot more you could do with this to help improve quality of life for fully blind people.
I’ve heard stories of people using the Meta smart glasses to help with reduced vision, i.e. asking the LLM assistant what you’re looking at, asking it to read a label, etc. The LLM assistant can see the camera feed so it is capable of doing that.
However things like the urgent warnings you mentioned don’t exist yet.
Hearing about the way people with bad vision use these glasses kind of changed my viewpoint on them to be honest; for the average person it might seem useless to be able to ask an LLM about what you’re looking at, but looking at it from an accessibility standpoint it seems like a really good idea.
Every time I read about smart glasses I wonder the same thing. Obviously the technology isn’t perfect, but it seems that even a basic pair of smart glasses with primitive image processing could be life-changing for a completely blind person. Yet as far as I can tell, most blind people don’t use technology at all for this purpose.
Unfortunately, the HN website is extremely unfriendly to users relying on assistive technologies (lack of ARIA tags, semantic elements etc.), otherwise there might be more blind people commenting here who could shed light on such things, no pun intended.
I was just reading about an app in the iOS App Store called Seeing AI that "narrates the world around you". (All disclaimers apply, this is exactly all I know about it.)
If the top-level poster succeeds, the resulting device could possibly disable devices that allow blind people to see. This could open up another liability channel.
They also reset all passwords of all Mixpanel employees; that surely sounds like either Mixpanel staff accounts were compromised, or the breach was conducted via a staff account.
I really don't understand the point in downplaying this shitshow.
> European satellites can and do regularly launch on SpaceX though.
For now, that is. Until someone from Europe says something mean about the Bully in Chief, or threatens to side with the victim of an aggressive war… The EU can’t trust the USA anymore, so it’s high time to invest in sovereign orbit access.
Panspermia is pretty much irrelevant to the actual question though; even assuming life got to Earth the hitchhiker way, it would have to have developed on another planet, and we’re back to square one.
Panspermia is kind of weird to think about IMHO. Because, it likely took a long time to develop and a long time to travel here. So it must have started a long time ago. Before the Solar system was created. But Sol is pretty old. How early could life have started really?
That gets into astrobiology. Theoretically life could have started as soon as its basic ingredients were ready. So not until things had cooled down a bit after the Bang, when there were heavier elements than hydrogen and helium; and some kind of land and water.
> In the redshift range 100 . (1 + z) . 137, the cosmic microwave background (CMB) had a temperature of 273–373 K (0-100◦C), allowing early rocky planets (if any existed) to have liquid water chemistry on their surface and be habitable, irrespective of their distance from a star.
> In the standard ΛCDM cosmology, the first star-forming
halos within our Hubble volume started collapsing at these redshifts,allowing the chemistry of life to possibly begin when the Universe was merely 10–17 million years old.
In comparison, our beloved sun is estimated to have been born 9.2 billion years after the Big Bang, a third of the way into the universe's history so far.
> The Sun is approximately 4.6 billion years old, while the age of the universe, based on current estimates, is about 13.8 billion years.
So our solar system is not that old, relatively speaking. We're among elders, some stars are three times older than the sun.
> In the future, however, life might continue to emerge on planets orbiting dwarf stars, like our nearest neighbor, Proxima Centauri, which will endure hundreds of times longer than the sun’s.
> Ultimately, it would be desirable for humanity to relocate to a habitable planet around a dwarf star like Proxima Centauri b, where it could keep itself warm near a natural nuclear furnace for up to 10 trillion years into the future.
The earliest galaxies formed when the universe was just a few hundred million years old, which means there may have been planets that are 3x times older than Earth.
Several caveats apply, chiefly that heavy elements weren't produced for a while in significant quantity, but were produced fairly early on due to large stars exploding relatively quickly, when they were merely tens of millions of years old, if that.
No single entity should have that much power, especially no venture-capital backed one.
reply