<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: aatd86</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=aatd86</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2026 10:52:42 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=aatd86" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Signals, the push-pull based algorithm"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Can the reactive graph even be updated concurrently if the UI depends on it though?
Because the UI is likely to run in its own single thread...</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 06 Apr 2026 17:38:41 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47664209</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47664209</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47664209</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Farewell, Rust for web"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>There is a moral hazard here. By accepting that APIs are forever, you  tend to be more cautious and move toward getting it right the first time.
Slower is better... And also faster in the long run, as things compose.
Personally, I do believe that there is one best way to do things quite often, but time constraints make people settle.<p>At least it is my experience building some systems.<p>Not sure it is always a good calculus to defer the hard thinking to later.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2026 21:01:33 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47079314</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47079314</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47079314</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "The only moat left is money?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>You will probably have time related free credits for AI usage.
The more you sell stuff that are in demand and ship fast, the higher price you can command.
Otherwise you just get basic income.
People will have to be creative. Creativity doesn't scale to machines. Creative decision making has too many branches.<p>So time based costs for product manufacturing and procurement.<p>Everyone will barter again in a sense.<p>Better money circulation. Those who just want entertainment can also do nothing. But entertainment will be a more important field. Already the case with tiktok, everyone is becoming an interntainer(sic) these days.<p>You have things such as the police olympics so to speak in the UAE...
:)<p>So coaching people, personal improvement, wellness, will be good fields to be in.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 19 Feb 2026 19:23:09 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47077925</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47077925</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47077925</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Mathematicians disagree on the essential structure of the complex numbers (2024)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>erratum: (1,1) rather</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2026 16:08:43 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47049049</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47049049</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47049049</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Write-only code"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>There will be more of it where it does not matter.
Maybe eventually with times.
At the moment, in my experience, most systems rely on hyperlinear semantics. Especially scalable ones.
Current llms cannot physically handle this at the moment. Maybe with biological or quantum (sic) computing.<p>But even then it is quite impressive.<p>Concretely in my use case, off of a manual base of code, having claude has the planner and code writer and  GPT as the reviewer works very well.
GPT is somehow better at minutiae and thinking in depth. But claude is a bit smarter and somehow has better coding style.<p>Before 4.5, GPT was just miles ahead.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2026 12:29:22 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47046768</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47046768</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47046768</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Mathematicians disagree on the essential structure of the complex numbers (2024)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Maybe it is a notation issue.<p>What is a negative number? What is multiplication? What is a complex "number"?
Complex are not even orderable. Is complex addition an overloading of the addition operator. Same with multiplication?<p>What i squared is -1 ? What does -1 even mean? Is the sign, a kind of operator?<p>The geometric interpretation help. These are transformations. Instead of 1 + i, we could/should write (1,i)<p>The AI might be clearer: <a href="https://gemini.google.com/share/6e00fab74749" rel="nofollow">https://gemini.google.com/share/6e00fab74749</a><p>A lot of math is not very clear because it is not very well taught. The notations are unclear.
For instance,  another example is: what is the difference between a matrix and a tensor? But that is another debate for anyone who wants to think about it. The definition found in books is often kind of wrong making a distinction that shouldn't really exist more often than not.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2026 01:59:43 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46969808</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46969808</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46969808</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Is particle physics dead, dying, or just hard?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>SO(3)*, not SU</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2026 15:38:45 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46961217</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46961217</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46961217</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Is particle physics dead, dying, or just hard?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>What was new was not tensors. It was the representation in SU of mesons for photon-photon collisions. But even saying that is skimming the surface.
I can't read beyond the knowledge gap.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2026 04:43:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46955476</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46955476</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46955476</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Is particle physics dead, dying, or just hard?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Isn't it the mathematics that is lagging? Amplituhedron? Higher dimensional models?<p>Fun fact: I got to read the thesis of one my uncles who was a young professor back in the 90's. Right when they were discovering bosons. They were already modelling  them as tensors back then.
And probably multilinear transformations.<p>Now that I am grown I can understand a little more, I was about 10 years old back then. I had no idea he was studying and teaching the state of the art. xD</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2026 00:27:23 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46953669</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46953669</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46953669</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Vouch"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Does is overlap with Contributor License Agreement?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 08 Feb 2026 18:14:27 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46936927</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46936927</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46936927</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "France's homegrown open source online office suite"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Do these administrations still  purchase licenses for software or do they  just create open source maintained by government employees?
How much are they willing to pay?
Because people in Europe are notoriously paid less so I am curious of the financial aspect.
Also curious about the logistics of ownership and support...</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 07 Feb 2026 20:10:05 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46927379</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46927379</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46927379</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Data Processing Benchmark Featuring Rust, Go, Swift, Zig, Julia etc."]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Isn't that measuring the speed of json encoding instead?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2026 02:24:50 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46843032</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46843032</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46843032</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Squishy Go"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Nice, first time I try this game... Guess I am not a natural..
It's not like othello/reversi haha.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2026 16:51:41 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46694170</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46694170</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46694170</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Cloudflare acquires Astro"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Yeah. Well to their defense, it is probably to be understood as islands of interactivity lost in a sea of static elements.
The term is definitely more evocative.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2026 19:44:59 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46651188</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46651188</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46651188</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Cloudflare acquires Astro"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>now that you say it :o<p>Should be astro lakes or something.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2026 17:36:23 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46649194</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46649194</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46649194</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Lightpanda migrate DOM implementation to Zig"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Would be great if it could be used as a wasm library... Just saying... Is it?
I would actually need and use this.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 12 Jan 2026 19:30:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46593049</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46593049</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46593049</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Ripple: The Elegant TypeScript UI Framework"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Tough luck, something is coming from my end at some point this year.
The remix guys are coming with something too.
You won't force me to useReact, sorry... ;D</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2026 10:01:52 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46574144</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46574144</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46574144</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Anthropic blocks third-party use of Claude Code subscriptions"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>There is no loyalty. They eho have the best models win.<p>The only way remains to try and lock consumers into your ecosystem.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2026 19:09:31 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46557790</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46557790</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46557790</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Signals vs. Query-Based Compilers"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Just a little feedback:
Incremental is good. That allows for partial recompilation. You also want to establish good compilation unit demarcation.<p>However wrt to query being different from signals, especially since you described it in terms of push/pull, the difference is not very clear.
pull is basically your query, or you actively recompiling.
push is handled when you take livereloading into account.<p>There is no real difference.<p>Now there are different algorithm to handle the graph traversal recomputations.
If you want to do it once, I guess it needs to be depth ordered and you need to recompile level by level each compilation unit that changed. So that you visit only once.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 18:48:17 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46544837</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46544837</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46544837</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by aatd86 in "Sergey Brin's Unretirement"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Because of asymmetry. Some people are more inclined toward certain things than others.
People who are excellent at math are much more likely to be able to advance AI for instance.
The goal of physical systems being to remain at rest/(humans included ;) the gradient of resources lean toward these people so that they can improve the technology allowing everyone to be able to conserve their energy (be lazy in a sense).</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:48:46 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46535523</link><dc:creator>aatd86</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46535523</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46535523</guid></item></channel></rss>