AI requires a holistic revision. When the OS's catch up, we'll have some real fun.

The author is good to call out the differences in UX. Sad that design has always been given less attention.

When I first saw the title, my initial thought was this may relate to AX, which I think compliments the topic very well: https://x.com/gregisenberg/status/1947693459147526179

I had stumbled upon Kidlin’s Law—“If you can write down the problem clearly, you’re halfway to solving it”.

This is a powerful guiding principle in today’s AI-driven world. As natural language becomes our primary interface with technology, clearly articulating challenges not only enhances our communication but also maximizes the potential of AI.

The async approach to coding has been most fascinating, too.

I will add, I've been using Repl.it *a lot*, and it takes everything to another level. Getting to focus on problem solving, and less futzing with hosting (granted it is easy in the early journey of a product) - is an absolute game changer. Sparking joy.

I personally use the analogy of mario kart mushroom or star; that's how I feel using these tools. It's funny though, because when it goes off the rails, it really goes off the rails lol. It's also sometimes necessary to intercept decisions it will take.. babysitting can take a toll (because of the speed of execution). Having to deal with 1 stack was something.. now we're dealing with potential infinite stacks.

[*] limited bandwidth (8 kHz), providing a valuable opportunity to enhance and specialize models for telephony applications, ensuring better performance and user experience even with low-fidelity audio inputs.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41314538

Points: 1

# Comments: 1

Dropping a note that I've found https://akash.network/ ~ https://akash.network/gpus/ to be impressive, as typically with crypto projects it's all scams, however in this instance there's demand and legit usage. https://stats.akash.network/

Something to consider!

Not sure what you mean by "we've all already come to the conclusion that equality of opportunity is a privilege we all would benefit from".. equal opportunity is not a privilege - it's a baseline.

How can you genuinely say that everyone is "in some way privileged"? The whole idea of privilege is that only few have it, especially in the context we're talking about. I can think of so many marginalized groups in society that enjoy no privilege whatsoever.

Lastly, re: "we would simply be repeating history", please shed light on this, I don't really get it.

So going to back to the original poster, had he been aware of this privilege he would not make statements about reverse discrimination or some injustice being perpetuated against him or other men due to policies that support women's equal participation in our industry.

It's not about dictionary definitions of words, it's about how discrimination manifests (or how it cannot in the hands of those who don't hold power). Surely we can debate what discrimination means, but there's a plethora of sociological literature on the intersection of that dictionary definition (that you referenced) and how it comes to fruition in the hands of dominant groups. This is obviously central to this discussion as it was implied that there was somehow reverse discrimination against men.

Please share what you think about that, genuinely curious.

Do you have no understanding of what discrimination is? Discrimination is perpetuated by those who hold power - it is completely and directly proportional to dominance - those who do not hold power cannot discriminate.

You know why? Because if you don't have power, your ideas do not come into implementation (you don't have resources!).

Therefore, a dominant group i.e. men or white people, cannot be discriminated against because they are the centre of power - they are the arbiters.

This BS of reverse sexism that you are perpetuating is complete nonsense with absolutely zero sociological backing. Therefore, the men you reference were not "discriminated" against.

In fact, your reference to "normal people" shows how un-nuanced you are in your understanding of discrimination and society in general.

Also, the fact that you expect a diversity of ideas from a homogenous group of people is absurd - unique ideas come through because people have unique backgrounds and experiences - as these in turn act as frameworks for their intellectual products.

Has it ever occurred to you that having people with "diverse" "skin" and "sexual orientation" could actually contribute to your goal of having diverse ideas?

Don't cite one conference as proof for why men are discriminated against. Do you know who was part of the blind review process? and more importantly, does that selection reflect on the quality of scholarship put forth by female candidates or is it the product of the experiences of the people sitting on the panel?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11926467

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10739725

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10461383

Points: 2

# Comments: 0