<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: jfjfjtur</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=jfjfjtur</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2026 17:47:22 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=jfjfjtur" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by jfjfjtur in "Hyper Typing"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I think the point though was that practical solutions can be imperfect, and spending complexity in an attempt at perfection can lead to impractical solutions.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 09:29:40 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43924543</link><dc:creator>jfjfjtur</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43924543</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43924543</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by jfjfjtur in "How linear regression works intuitively and how it leads to gradient descent"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Yes, and it seems like it could’ve been written in-part by an LLM. But, the LLM could take your criticism, improve upon the original, and iterate that way until you feel that it has produced something close to an optimal textbook. The one thing missing is soul. I noticeably don’t feel like there was anyone behind this writing.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 08 May 2025 09:23:41 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43924499</link><dc:creator>jfjfjtur</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43924499</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43924499</guid></item></channel></rss>