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

Location: Brazil Remote: yes Willing to relocate: yes Technologies: Golang, Typescript, React, Python, FP languages Résumé/CV: https://docs.google.com/document/d/11QB_Gr_UV3r8nHOb-wXUmamZ... Email: leonardo.farroco at gmail.com

e2e web dev (frontend, backend, cloud, devops, you name it). I've been working on the PST timezone since 2019, so I'm used to that already : )


well, promises' computations start as soon as they are created, so they are not composable. and there' no cancellation/resource control as well. so I guess that the criticism is valid


The model that google is using to handle requests in their search page is probably dumber than the other ones for cost savings. Not sure if this would be a smart move, as search with ads is their flagship product. It would be better having no ai in search at all.


> better having no ai in search

But then the product manager wouldn't get a promotion. They don't seem to care about providing a good service anymore.

> probably dumber than the other ones for cost savings

It's amusing how anyone at Google thinks offering a subpar and error-prone AI search result would not affect their reputation worse than it already is.

It's making stuff up, giving bad or fatal advice, promoting false political narratives, stealing content and link juice from actual content creators. They're abusing their anti-competitively dominant position, and just burning good will like it's gonna last forever. Maybe they're too big to fail, and they no longer need reputation or the trust of the public.


Bad information is inherently better for Google than correct information. If you get the correct information you only do one search. If you get bad, or misleading information that requires you to perform more searches that it is definitely better for Google.


This is a variation of the parable of the broken window. It is addressed in what may be the most influential essay in modern economics, "That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window


I've never liked that parable; it seems to me an incredibly poor argument, standing on its own. It literally itself contrasts the definite circulation of money in the destruction case, with a "could" spend on other things. Or he could not. He could have kept it, waiting for another opportunity later, reducing the velocity of money and contributing to inequality.

It doesn't even cover non-renewable resources, or state that the window intact is a form of wealth on its own!

I'm not naive, I'm sure thousands have made these arguments before me. I do think intact windows are good. I'm just surprised that particular framing is the one that became the standard


What's your point here? That Google wouldn't do this because "the broken window fallacy is a fallacy"?

We have them on the record in multiple lawsuits stating that they did exactly this.


That makes sense, poor search results lead to more engagement. That is devious.. Now that you've pointed it out I can't unsee it.


In same cases, lower quality of search results leads to more ad clicks and thus more revenue.


Perverse incentive structure


I've also thought about this. It has to be a terrible AI to scale like this and provide these instantaneous answers. And probably heavy caching too.


I don't think most people care if the information is true; they just want an answer. Google destroyed the value of search by encouraging and promoting SEO blog spam, the horrible ai summary that confidently tells you some lie can now be sold as an improvement over the awful thing they were selling, and the majority will eat it up. I have to assume the ad portion of the business will be folded into the AI results at some point. The results already suck, making them sponsored won't push people any further away.


if it's dumber than the other ones then it must be really fucking stupid


> as search with ads is their flagship product.

no, ads are their flagship product. Anything else is just a medium for said ads, and therefore fair game for enshittification.


that might be possible by asking it to create an 3d model with animations (based on a template) and then capture the sprites. but then again, not sure if building it would be worthwhile because 1) openai might add that as a native product (like what happened with .ppt generation) or 2) the capability to do so might be 6 months away


Best anti-firebase post I've ever seen


Yah, I hope this doesn't end up costing them an arm and a leg :( it was working last night


this project doesn't use a backend, so not sure why firebase is needed. github pages would have unlimited bandwidth.


Bad idea, as some people use old Android phones as IOT devices


The sentence "The blast blasted blubber beyond all believable bounds" deserves to be engraved there


Let's not forget "land-lubber newsmen, soon to become land-blubber newsmen"


I don't know why people take UB seriously. He never provided proof of any work experience - he claims to have worked for just a single company that... never shipped any code into production. Even his code examples on GitHub are just snippets, not even a to-do app (well, I think that his style of "just one thing per function" works as a self-fulfilling prophecy).

Maybe people like him are the reason why we have to do leet code tests (I don't believe he would be capable of solving even an easy problem).


Uncle Bob is one of the core contributors to Fitnesse, which had moderate success in the Java popularity era back in the day.

Also, you do understand that people worked as software engineers even before Github became popular, or open sourcing to begin with, do you? So if someone is 60+ year old, chances are that most of his work has never been open sourced, and his work was targeting use cases, platforms, services which have no utility in this age any more.

Which have all nothing to do with how good a software engineer someone is.

And finally, do you have any proof that he never shipped any code into production?


> So if someone is 60+ year old, chances are that most of his work has never been open sourced,

John Ousterhout is 70 years old and one of the open source pioneers. We don't know what Uncle Bob shipped or did not ship but his friendly opponent in this discussion definitley did ship high profile projects.


I'm 72. As for what I have shipped over the half-century of my career, you can read all about that in part two of my book We, Programmers. Suffice it to say I've shipped a LOT of code.


Do you mean commits to the project like this crap: https://github.com/unclebob/fitnesse/commit/d6034080a04c740c...

This level of pointless obfuscation would not survive a code review at any sane dev team.


It's the kind of commit that you get from someone that wants to look productive but is just renaming variables in their IDE.


The criticism was that UB worked at a company that allegedly didn’t ship code to production, not that he doesn’t have a corpus of open source projects on GitHub.


> So if someone is 60+ year old, chances are that most of his work has never been open source

Somewhat ageist? I'm 72 and have produced a number of FOSS tools.


Truly. I know plenty of people in their 60s and 70s who use Git and are still very sharp programmers.


Using Git is unrelated to whether the software you write is proprietary or open-source.


My headcanon is that Pokemon Go is a bad game on purpose. Intelligence agencies get the geolocation data (that has been proved already) and Nintendo gets the rights to publish regular games - this way they are not competing directly with the franchise owner.

- Niantic itself bragging about it https://nianticlabs.com/news/largegeospatialmodel?hl=en


No need to worry: there are amazing optimizations happening in the software and hardware world, but outside the US - unless you don't consider these places as being part of "Civilization"


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

Search: