<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: mistercow</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=mistercow</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 04:04:38 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=mistercow" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Half-Life ported to Mac OS 9"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I think the technology also dictated it. It’s easy to forget that in those days the idea of window chrome being full color, full transparency, with live window dragging and visuals not locked to tiling 8x8 or at best 32x32 elements was incredibly novel. And that was as much about preemptive multitasking and expecting and allowing every application to keep its windows up to date as it was about Quartz.<p>Aqua was garish and in your face, but it needed to be in order to be a symbol of what the system had achieved, which I think was especially important because that came at the cost of being a buggy, immature OS that had to run crucial apps in a hideous compatibility mode while it was getting established.<p>Edit: and if I can be a cranky old codger for a moment, I think that Liquid Glass unintentionally serves just as well as a symbol for what Apple has become: a company grasping to relive the memory of innovation without remembering how to innovate.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2026 23:49:27 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49091570</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49091570</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49091570</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Why does kinetic energy increase quadratically, not linearly, with speed? (2011)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>But the intuition based on the constant gravity assumption <i>correctly</i> illustrates the point, and adding in the more complicated picture of non-constant gravity creates new terms that exactly cancel out to give the same answer. Why would you talk against intuitions that work correctly?<p>And to be clear, building intuitions that fail at certain scales is still a useful and important thing to do. But you <i>haven't</i> shown a scale where these intuitions fail. That's not insightful, it's just throwing smoke bombs for no reason.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2026 01:13:04 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48755167</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48755167</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48755167</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Why does kinetic energy increase quadratically, not linearly, with speed? (2011)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>If you're talking about intuitions, you have no firsthand intuitions about lifting effort decreasing with distance to the Earth. We can intuit about constant gravity, and the math of constant gravity works fine for this description.<p>And while the real situation at scale is more complicated, the math is going to come out to the same answer, albeit with extra terms muddying everything up.<p>If someone says that something true can be illustrated intuitively with a thought experiment, "sure, but what if we take that to a scale where our intuitions fail" is a sort of odd place to take the discussion unless you're genuinely curious how the math is going to shake out.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2026 17:02:53 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48699860</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48699860</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48699860</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Show HN: Monolisa v3 – a typeface for developers and creatives"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>IANAL, but isn't most of that unenforceable in the US? Typefaces have their own weird place in IP law which is different from copyright.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 01:48:27 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48667845</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48667845</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48667845</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "45°C cooling design cuts data center water use to near zero"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>And I think the answer to the "doing the math" question is, until you've actually collected the data, "what math?" Until someone actually puts a bunch of six-figure value hardware through its paces, pushes the previous limits, and sees what that does to its lifespan, there's nothing to meaningfully calculate.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 01:35:09 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48667753</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48667753</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48667753</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Image Compression"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>WebP generally preserves higher visual quality at the same compression ratios as JPEG. You can make bad looking images with either codec by demanding smaller file sizes, but all else equal, WebP usually looks better.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2026 12:53:19 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48584560</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48584560</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48584560</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Image Compression"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> More so than any other image format, JPEG takes advantage of the quirks of human perception to throw away information while largely preserving quality.<p>That is a very odd thing to say in a post that also mentions WebP. I would say that of all the commonly supported lossy image codecs released since 1992, JPEG takes the <i>least</i> advantage of human perception quirks.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2026 00:56:34 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48579172</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48579172</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48579172</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Can I Buy Your KV Cache?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Well, it’s one flaw. I would argue that the bigger flaw, which you alluded to, is that the cost of computing the cache yourself maxes out in the single digit dollars even very large frontier models, and that’s a one-time cost. Even if you imagine all the logistics are free and all the transfers are instant, what are we even talking about here from an economic perspective?<p>KV caching is a super interesting engineering space, especially when you’re talking about local models where compute and memory bandwidth are highly constrained and you’re trying to trim fractions of a second everywhere you can by flipping between different ICL prefixes. But selling caches for specific documents just makes no sense at all.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 23:28:26 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48510580</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48510580</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48510580</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Can I Buy Your KV Cache?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> Then the part that matters: <i>where the KV lives</i><p>When your abstract was clearly generated by an LLM and not curated to at least make it sound human, it does not make me want to read your paper.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 21:53:32 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48509873</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48509873</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48509873</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "LLMs are eroding my software engineering career and I don't know what to do"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> And I didn't learn anything.<p>So first off, I mean, of course you didn't, right? You had already learned most of what you were going to learn from this specific project by doing it by hand.<p>But yes, if you use AI to do projects that might have been at the edge of your abilities pre-AI, you will learn a lot less. The solution, I've found, is to get more ambitious until you're back to the edge of your abilities even with AI. You should be asking the agent questions like "has anyone tried?" and keep pushing until it isn't sure, and you're not sure you have any idea what you're doing. Then ask questions until you feel like you <i>sort of</i> know what you're doing, and verify your understanding by directing the agent to build.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2026 00:26:24 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48469645</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48469645</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48469645</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Graphing Scientific Calculator Based on the ESP32"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I'm pretty sure they just vibe coded the site in half an hour on a lark. High gloss without any real direction or intent behind it is the new "vanilla html page with no CSS file", or maybe less charitably, the new clip art.<p>And that's fine, right? Like people can do what they want. We're just going to get used to it.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 13:04:29 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48179229</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48179229</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48179229</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Replace IBM Quantum back end with /dev/urandom"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Are your old hard drives encrypted using asymmetric cryptography? If not, I'm not sure who made you that promise.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2026 10:25:38 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47900275</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47900275</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47900275</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "GPT-5.4"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>My current hunch is that that benchmark captures most of the relevant gap between Anthropic and the rest. “Can’t distinguish truth from fiction” has long been one of the deeper complaints about LLMs, and the bullshit benchmark seems like a clever approach to testing at least some of that.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2026 00:10:16 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47269021</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47269021</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47269021</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Claude Code LSP"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I don't mind if people use AI to help them write, but when I see this kind of thing, it implies to me that they're barely even skimming it before posting. Surely people don't <i>want</i> this super cliche AI-hype-man tone in their blog posts, right? And if they haven't taken the time to at least skim through it and iterate on basic style, why should I assume it's worth my time to read it?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2026 13:13:04 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47217557</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47217557</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47217557</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Stop generating, start thinking"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> Maybe its because I'm using not-frontier models to do the coding<p>IMO it’s probably that. The difference between where this was a a year ago and now is night and day, and not using frontier models is roughly like stepping back in time 6-12 months.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2026 07:01:28 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46942384</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46942384</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46942384</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Vitamin D and Omega-3 have a larger effect on depression than antidepressants"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Flax seeds are a very tedious and inefficient way to get omega-3 as a vegan, particularly because they contain ALA, a short chain omega-3, which our bodies are extremely inefficient at turning into long chain fatty acids.<p>Just get an algae oil based DHA+EPA supplement.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2026 11:47:49 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46808927</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46808927</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46808927</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Go Gray, Not Cray: Why You Should Grayscale Your Phone"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Fine, luma, not luminance. But what you're describing is exactly that calculation. This does not change my point. Again: If you’re doing this correctly, the perceived brightness stays the same.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2025 15:29:23 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46411734</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46411734</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46411734</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Go Gray, Not Cray: Why You Should Grayscale Your Phone"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>So specifically on a backlit LCD screen with dimming zones, and in the specific case where an entire zone would have originally been blue or red (which are perceptually  dimmer), you could plausibly get a small amount of energy savings. But “twice the battery life” from this is not plausible.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2025 10:11:34 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46409966</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46409966</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46409966</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Go Gray, Not Cray: Why You Should Grayscale Your Phone"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Yeah, that’s the only explanation that makes sense. It’s just so strange to think that color pixels would use more energy.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2025 05:02:25 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46408612</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46408612</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46408612</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by mistercow in "Go Gray, Not Cray: Why You Should Grayscale Your Phone"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> It seems obvious that a higher perceived brightness can be achieved for any given pixel if using greyscale instead of using colors, just because less of the backlight's area is occluded.<p>When converting to grayscale, you typically calculate the value of the pixel and then set all color components to that value. The point of this is to keep the luminance the same as it was in the original color pixel. If you’re doing this correctly, the perceived brightness stays the same.<p>And just as a smell test: have you ever converted an image to grayscale and flinched away because it seemed twice as bright? Of course not; it just loses its color.<p>The only way you would get more perceived brightness at lower backlight intensity would be if you physically removed the color gels that overlay the LCD matrix. Which is obviously not what they’ve done here.<p>I’m pretty sure the increase in battery life they observed is simply because they’re using their phone less, which is very much the main upshot of the other benefits they listed. The idea that color pixels drain more energy is just obviously nonsense.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 28 Dec 2025 04:49:38 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46408556</link><dc:creator>mistercow</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46408556</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46408556</guid></item></channel></rss>