Hacker Timesnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | arbitrary_name's commentslogin

no, it's the fact that in accidents (where you are not the cause), people die disproportionately under your giant vehicle. it's safer for you, but almost no one else.

and don't get me started on the environmental/political aspects.

why would someone questioning your selfish (I'm not targeting you personally, just voicing a general perspective) decision have anything to do with jealousy?


Political?

>it's safer for you, but almost no one else.

No its safe for everyone else too. It wont even let me run into a tree.

>have anything to do with jealousy

Wish I knew, its just the only thing left when driving an efficient, safe vehicle that just happens to be large.


I'm using it to learn coding.

i could not get through the hurdles of installing an IDE and js/python modules before.

now i am learning basic scripting and data modeling etc.

it is phenomenal for learning languages.

i built a chicken coop and some furniture. the skills and confidence i gained are real. am i failing to learn certain skills in the process? of course. but I'm getting further then i would on my own, and that is truly meaningful.

you can keep dismissing it; but I'm genuinely using it to break down barriers, give me confidence, and highlight my ignorance in very productive ways.

i find it bizarre how unwilling some people are to recognize that.


> i could not get through the hurdles of installing an IDE and js/python modules before

You want us to believe you couldn't overcome the puddle-deep challenge of installing an IDE and using Pip or Node in the past, but now you're actually learning how to write functions?

Cool for you if true I guess but I'm pretty seriously skeptical


I can sort of buy this, honestly. When was the last time you picked up a new language with unfamiliar tooling? Especially something older that won't hold your hand.

A lot of the most miserable parts of getting started coding have nothing to do with programming and everything to do with like, trying to apt-install the right compiler version or figure out which build headers you need or some other equally trivial bullshit that gets in the way of writing code.


> I can sort of buy this, honestly. When was the last time you picked up a new language with unfamiliar tooling?

I started learning Monogame with C# literally yesterday after being a chiefly JavaScript dev for over a decade. I'm having a lot of fun learning it from scratch with no AI

I'll concede that before yesterday it had been a while though

> Especially something older that won't hold your hand

Python and JavaScript are two of the most "will hold your hand" languages these days aren't they?

> A lot of the most miserable parts of getting started coding have nothing to do with programming and everything to do with like, trying to apt-install the right compiler version or figure out which build headers you need or some other equally trivial bullshit that gets in the way of writing code.

I agree but absolutely not for these two languages in particular

You can open the developer tools in any major browser and start typing in JavaScript right there if you want

Python you can install it and write it right in any editor

The upfront burden for both languages is absolutely trivial imo


Python environment management is notoriously reticulate. I can totally imagine that they got stuck on some path bullshit so that the installed packages were on a different Python than the one they launched in the IDE. I've been using and configuring computers since they had DIP switches and if I were teaching someone to code manually I would absolutely let them use Claude to get their environment set up.

it is extremely difficult to do in cases like this. again, why are we pulling the sensors? why not leave them in place and stop paying for maintenance?

why not find alternate funding mechanisms?

because we know who these people are, and what their motives are. they show us time and and time again.

empathy is something to be used against us.


Well. Even if you want to attribute a bad motive that would give more clarity. Maybe the people involved in these projects have expressed disagreement with the admin, so they don’t want to pay them.

What’s so important about these particular sensors that any change in resourcing is a categorical evil?


yes? why is that even a question.

you have enough money to buy a phone and spare time to comment, just like me, while people die of hunger and thirst in Sudan: 50 dollars would buy life saving medicines and water treatment. but i spent it on a Spotify subscription and some weed.

also, i stepped over a homeless guy on my way into the grocery store last week.


>also, i stepped over a homeless guy on my way into the grocery store last week.

This.

The evidence that it's possible is all around us. Right in our faces. That people believe that, somehow, other people will start caring when it's me who doesn't have water is a bit naive. Why would people not just step over a hypothetical "homeless me" on their way to get a Starbuck's?

It's even easier to ignore if the vast majority of such people are not on the streets, but safely hidden away in crappy parts of town struggling to afford their rent and food. That way the privileged don't have to see them.

Not saying it's good or right, just kind of saying, I mean, of course it's possible. It's the way things work right now.

If the poster didn't notice it works like this, chances are, they were always one of the people in the caravan who had the water.


Last I checked it was about $3000 per life saved by the most efficient methods. Looking at effective altruism communities. Mostly malaria nets.

Arguably Sudan is a different caravan. And the totally destitute in most industrialized countries are a small minority. So, currently people can keep the mindset that they still have a chance. Once that illusion shatters, expect violence (which might not achieve anything).

i think that is an overly simplistic axiom: the utilities must cover a fixed asset base (poles and wires and transformers), pretty much regardless of how much or whether a household consumes from the grid.

the less the utility recoups via billing for energy usage, the bigger the deficit to cover their fixed network costs.

they are frequently interested in having you consume energy, to help defray those costs, especially where the marginal cost of the energy is very low.

the more users who disconnect, the more the fixed costs must be recouped from a shrinking customer base, triggering more incentive to leave the network. this is called the death spiral.

In addition, things like balcony solar don't save them cost: it introduces complexity because they need to safely manage that load, they need to be able to predict and measure it; in my experience working with utilities and network operators for many years, they flat out don't want these distributed generation sources unless they have a lot of say in how they are added to the grid, and how users can be charged for the privilege of generating their own power. that is often a very significant barrier to regulatory change.


that’s true, i was considering only the perspective of the major city i live in rather than networks with lower ratepayer densities where the economics are probably totally different

i do think “fully consumed or gated to never backfeed balcony solar at scale” is all i’m referring to, which i naively hope is a smaller regulatory change than backfeeding


> I do think “fully consumed or gated to never backfeed balcony solar at scale” is all i’m referring to, which i naively hope is a smaller regulatory change than backfeeding

I though the point of these systems was you plug them in to your wall socket and they lower your electricity bill. If you want to avoid tieing to the grid you can't have such a simple deployment.


Everything I have seen about balcony solar requires it to be grid dependent and cannot backfeed.

>The greatest thing a person can do is raise a child and build a legacy.

nice opinion, but it seems you are increasingly in the minority.

if the older generations can't find it in their hearts to take the long term view on social security funding, housing, climate change... why should we feel obligated to breed so there is a nice conveyor belt of wage slaves for them the pull the ladder on?

you sound very entitled.

and i think about myself because in the US, if i don't, no one else will.


you mispelled 'every circle of hell'.

out of curiosity, why would you censor that word?


Kids. Habit.


what does this even mean?


why would the ultra wealthy care about it being an ev? operating cost and climate impact are not a priority when you are dropping 650k and living in a oil rich ME kingdom.

performance and aesthetics s would be more important, surely?


EVs are legitimately better to drive.


Why fixate on Arab countries? Rich people live all over the world and there are increasingly more emission restrictions. And again, as I keep repeating myself, just because you are not the target demographic does not mean it does not exist. I could easily see someone who does not care about cars wanting this because of the brand and yeah even EVs can matter depending on social circles.

You guys are defending this to death. I am only pointing out that it would not surprise me it fits a demographic they were targeting.


1) the Biden administration didn't start the war with Iran.

2)Sleepy Joe didn't pick a fight with the Pope

and that's just in the last month!

but that won't change your mind. nothing will.


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

Search: