<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: eitally</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=eitally</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2026 17:10:19 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=eitally" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Show HN: Where Were We"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I didn't know you could buy pieces at Fred Meyer, but I am also in the US and was 12 when the wall came down.  I, too, have a piece (with graffiti!).  It was a gift and I don't know where it came from, but my impression at that time was that it wasn't really much rarer than pumice from the Mt St Helens eruption (I have a piece of that, too, or a capsule of oil from the Prudhoe Bay disaster, which I also have in my collection from that era).</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2026 05:15:12 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50410596</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50410596</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50410596</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Tesla to wind down Cybertruck production"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I would suggest there are 4 kinds:<p>1. People who need them for work.
2. People who need to carry bulky loads
3. People who need to tow.
4. People who buy them for some form of self-expression.<p>The only real use case for electric trucks, imho, is construction site supervisors who do most around-town driving but may occasionally need to haul stuff.  Their towing range is absolutely abysmal (F150 Lightning range dropped to about 90 miles when towing a moderate trailer!).</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2026 16:20:07 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50394386</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50394386</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50394386</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Britain to make salary disclosure in job ads mandatory"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Heck, my experience lately has been that recruiters (or independent headhunters) are completely up front with the salary range explicitly because they don't want to waste anyone's time... and because there -- in tech especially -- can be enormous ranges of compensation for similar responsibilities.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2026 15:29:08 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393524</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393524</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393524</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Britain to make salary disclosure in job ads mandatory"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>It's a bureaucratic problem.  Getting a headcount approved for a specific role is a non-issue.  Getting HC approved for something brand new might be impressively complicated.  Especially at large companies, listed postings persist for many months sometimes and stagnate because functions, dynamics or org alignment shifts before anyone is hired.  It's much easier to write a generic-ish job posting and just coach the recruiter/screener on updated specifics than it is to retract a posting, rewrite it, and repost it.  This happened to me frequently when I was a hiring manager at Google, for example.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2026 15:27:14 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393499</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393499</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393499</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Britain to make salary disclosure in job ads mandatory"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>That's impractical most of the time.  It's much more efficient to handle leveling during the interview process, and to coach the technical recruiter to use screening questions that give a decent indication of where a viable candidate might slot.<p>It's also easiest for candidates.  If you are faced with 2 job postings about the same org at a company you may not have any experience with, how will you decide whether to apply for the lower or higher level role?  It's not always clear.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2026 15:07:05 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393228</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393228</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393228</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Britain to make salary disclosure in job ads mandatory"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This is an ideal state, for sure, but it's also where corporate bureaucracy gets in the way.  It's FAR easier to have a catch-all, pretty generic posting for a category of role than to get approval for discrete postings for each conceivable instantiation of that role category within a hiring org.  This is also why many [tech] companies will include leveling information in the posting in addition to a salary range, so candidates will know that they could be considered whether they slot in as, for example, an IC4 or IC5.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2026 15:05:23 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393206</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393206</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50393206</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Tell HN: Gemini trains on chat history, even for subscribers (personal accounts)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This is a risk issue.  They need users to explicitly opt in or they risk user-data-related compliance suits.  This has always been Google's problem, as an advertising company, and why they've taken so many seemingly awkward paths over the years with both Android & Cloud.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2026 13:29:49 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50365261</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50365261</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50365261</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Alphabet Announces Third Quarter 2026 Results [pdf]"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>At least in the case of Google, the pace of their buildout is very nearly being matched by the growth of Cloud consumption (and related contracts with companies like Anthropic & OAI).  Cloud had >100% y/y growth this quarter to >$30b rev.  That's insane, and it's quite profitable.  But consumption revenue is always a lagging indicator of capital investment, and it just so happens that this business cycle is demanding a scale of capex heretofore unimaginable. Institutional investors seem to have been happier with business as usual (big annual stock buy-backs, predictable cloud/ads/youtube growth in the high-20% range, EPS in the $5-9/share/qtr range, and an enormous pile of cash).  This is the first time since 2004 where buying GOOG really feels like placing a bet rather than buying a blue-chip.  To that point, this is <i>also</i> why GOOG has been treated like an AI company for the past 18mo or so, rather than a media & infrastructure company, and what justified the dramatic increase in it's P/E.<p>Taking a longer view, I have confidence things will work out well and this dip is a great buying opportunity, but I can also understand why the market several reasons to be skittish.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2026 03:11:56 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50284145</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50284145</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50284145</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Solar power is becoming bigger than nuclear"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Even in California it's legal to install non-grid-tied rooftop solar.  It requires permitting but does not require an interconnect agreement from the grid electrical utility.  We're "remodeling" our house in San Jose currently and the resulting property (includes new ADU) will have 1) old panels (NEM2) grid tied for main house, 2) new panels battery tied for main house & EV charging, 3) new panels (NEM3) grid tied for AGU.  PG&E does not care about the second item, provided they are installed per code.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2026 14:30:37 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50259974</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50259974</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50259974</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "OpenAI models are coming to Google Cloud"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>No.  It means customers can turn booked revenues into billed revenue by consuming OAI models on GCP (pass-through contracting). OAI will get their money, too, but Google will charge the customer for actual platform consumption.  This was previously missing and GCP customers who wanted ChatGPT or Codex were limited to just making API calls from their GCP projects .</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2026 23:39:11 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50189154</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50189154</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50189154</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Google open-sources TorchTPU, a native PyTorch back end for TPUs"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>It's showing up for enterprises (and ISVs) who need capacity from cloud vendors and can't get it.  Sometimes there are some GPU shapes available, but not always what you either need or want to pay for (e.g. a TPU vs a V100 vs a B300), and also not always in spot instances (frequently not).<p>The hyperscalers are all so oversubscribed that they require commits from enterprises so if you only have a transient need you might be out of luck [from your vendor of choice].  Additionally, not all GPU service providers are equal.  Semi Analysis has some great articles explaining why.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 20 Oct 2026 23:28:54 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50174111</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50174111</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50174111</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Why are we even doing all this?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>It may not be the most prescient or innovative sci fi series, but I read The Three Body Problem a few years ago and it's really stuck with me.  Specifically the description of how humanity reached an inflection point in math & physics research that almost immediately unlocked novel innovations in applied science ... which then made space exploration & settlement practical.  Moreover, that the antagonist society in the series decided their absolute best bet at avoiding complete annihilation was to hamstring humankind's scientific research -- and that's it.<p>It <i>feels</i> like frontier models are starting to approach an asymptote where what you suggest could become reality, and we'll begin seeing not just AI research but AI-designed & led applications of that research into fundamental parts of our society & culture.  For better and for worse.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2026 21:25:34 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50110515</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50110515</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50110515</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "New Withings Users Must Pay $99/Year for Apple Health Syncing"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I've had pretty good luck using Google Appscript to either access web APIs or screenscrape, then parse into a Google Sheet (which I either use as-is or as the source to populate a web app).</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2026 20:57:17 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50110103</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50110103</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50110103</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Americans' social activity has steeply declined in the past 30 years"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Totally off-base projection based on your very small sample size.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2026 17:18:42 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50091246</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50091246</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50091246</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "GLM-Legal"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I've spent quite a lot of time with corporate counsels over the past dozen years and one of my consistent findings is that they -- except in areas of liability and intellectual property -- almost always defer to the sponsoring business executive in defining terms and specifying the details of the contract.  They are present primarily to keep biz leaders and their counterparties operating within an acceptable risk profile but usually don't have strong opinions on much of anything else.<p>So, to me it isn't curious that your experience with Claude has been positive.  Provided you know what you're doing and you aren't asking Claude to go too far outside the expected norm, there wouldn't typically be a compelling reason for most contract attorneys to push back.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 12 Oct 2026 20:36:20 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50062697</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50062697</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50062697</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "I hired an illustrator to draw my house. Now it's my Home Assistant dashboard"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I think the audience for home automation is U-shaped.  There are folks who are neck deep in it and care deeply, and others who couldn't care less, but not many in the middle.  The middle 90% is decently served by Apple, Google and Amazon, too, so there's no need for any real passion or exploration by most anyway.<p>We're building a custom home and it's only been through this process that I've taken an interest in smart home / home automation.  Why?  Mostly because<p>1) building speakers into your walls & ceilings means you need to control their input somehow, and your gear is going to be in a wiring closet<p>2) if you don't want Alexas or Nest devices sitting around on horizontal surfaces, your voice control options are limited<p>3) you don't want your security camera footage stored in the cloud<p>4) you do want a single pane of glass for visibility into things like your HVAC, your irrigation system, your security system, your garage door status, and your AV gear.<p>Home Assistant is tremendously helpful as a FOSS alternative to Control4, Crestron, Savant, Lutron, and Josh.ai, but you can't entirely escape the "big tech" part of the ecosystem because each of the primary systems (say, your AV streaming or your power shades) will still require use of the OEM's product.  Many of which have integrations with or APIs exposed to Home Assistant, but not all.<p>There are some quality of life improvements available through automation, but most of it is incremental and only enthusiasts would really care.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2026 12:47:09 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50019721</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50019721</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50019721</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Telnet BBS Guide"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>San Jose. My wife and I have lived in the same house for 10 years and know about 80% of the neighbors in a two block radius. We also probably know 50 additional families within a square mile as a result of our kids going to public schools here.   This is essentially just like how it was when I grew up in the 80s, in a rural East Coast City of about 75k.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 14:26:41 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50006232</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50006232</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50006232</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Automatic Transmission – a data-privacy study of connected vehicles"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This, but worse, happened with my inlaws when they purchased a new Lexus (IIRC, a 2025 RX350).  It has whatever kind of built in navigation & traffic feature but they wanted to use Android Auto.  You can do that, but not until after you go through Lexus' vehicle/driver registration process to enable their built in system.  If you don't, not only will neither AA nor CarPlay work, but if you try to use the built in nav it will fail with a superimposed modal after a couple of minutes to nag you into creating an account.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 21:52:15 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49927495</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49927495</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49927495</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Google breaks promise to provide 10 years of updates to Chromebooks"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>That isn't what the OP was alleging.  Of course they store data -- encrypted both in transit and at rest, and you can even activate client side encryption (<a href="https://knowledge.workspace.google.com/admin/security/about-client-side-encryption" rel="nofollow">https://knowledge.workspace.google.com/admin/security/about-...</a>) -- but that doesn't mean they exfiltrate, use or share your data for their own purposes.<p>They don't, they never have, and they won't (unless there is a blatant, illegal policy violation and lapse of controls internally).  This is very similar to the controls and policies in place governing FedRAMP contracts or the control of PCI/financial or HIPAA/healthcare data.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 17:17:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49924429</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49924429</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49924429</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by eitally in "Google breaks promise to provide 10 years of updates to Chromebooks"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>None of those have anything to do with Google for Education contracts, and I hope you realize that.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 17:13:46 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49924368</link><dc:creator>eitally</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49924368</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49924368</guid></item></channel></rss>