WTF.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49005197

Points: 35

# Comments: 8

My favorite so far is the "Iff Specs Disk", with technical documentation on an ancient container and data format called IFF (Interchange File Format).

Like in the file ea.iff.85 [0], and this section explaining why common data file formats are useful the first place:

"The problem with expedient file formats - typically memory dumps - is that they're too provincial.

By designing data for one particular use (e.g. a screen snapshot), they preclude future expansion (would you like a full page picture? a multi-page document?).

In neglecting the possibility that other programs might read their data, they fail to save contextual information (how many bit planes? what resolution?). Ignoring that other programs might create such files, they're intolerant of extra data (texture palette for a picture editor), missing data (no color map), or minor variations (smaller image).

In practice, a filed representation should rarely mirror an in-memory representation. The former should be designed for longevity; the latter to optimize the manipulations of a particular program. The same filed data will be read into different memory formats by different programs."

Imagine having to explain to a professional developer today why having something like JSON is valuable. Most of us find it obvious.

But there was a time when this kind of thing was not obvious at all; the need for it had to be discovered the hard way, and then solutions invented from first principles.

We really are standing on the shoulders of those who came before us, in more ways than we realize.

[0] https://amigafreeware.downer.tech/17bit/17bit/61/contents/if...

"As people gravitate toward firsthand perspectives..."

That implies Google is seeing a shift away from people relying on just AI-generated summaries, and checking the cited sources more.

I have certainly found that when I ask a chat tool something, and then go to the human-written source webpage, it's not uncommon I get a different insight than what the AI implied. Not always of course, but often enough that I have noticed it.

[0] https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2026/07/search-con...

Boy, was it controversial. I could not believe how hard some people were pushing back in the comments.

Quoting from myself there:

"When you write your own words, you are forging your own voice. It is distinctive, conveys your unique world view, and connects with others in a way that is specific to you alone.

If you use an AI tool to write for you instead, you lose all of that."

That seems blindingly self-evident to me, but apparently a lot of folks disagree.

Something else I said:

"Writing is hard because thinking is hard. When you write, you forge your thoughts, distinctions, mental models and even feelings into the clarity of precision that the written word demands. When you outsource your writing to an AI tool, you lose more than you know."

I guess a lot of people don't want to bother with all that.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48760466

Points: 5

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47151173

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

In my case, I self-published and sold a book for several years, and then published an updated version with O'Reilly.

I decided to do that because I came to realize people judge self-publish books as less vetted and lower quality.

That may be often true. But in many cases, a self-published book can be much better than those released by a former publisher. I certainly believe it was true in my case.

But in the end, I decided my highest best opportunity was to go with a well-regarded publisher, for the authority that would bring.

And it changed things. People treat me differently now, like they consider me more of an authority. Even though it's essentially the same book; it just has an O'Reilly logo on the cover now.

Whether that should be the case is up for debate...

But it absolutely made people listen more seriously to my message. and I believe it has massively increased the positive impact of that book on the world.

Financially, I think it's been about even. For me it was worth the tradeoff for other reasons, but I don't think that is always the case for every author and every book.

I will say I was very happy with the animal they came up with! If I was not, I would have asked them to change it, and I bet they would have. They showed me a preview version early on, so there would have been plenty of time to do so.

The whole experience was wonderful. I had basically none of the problems that this fellow experienced with his publisher, and I am delighted about how it went.

I did some things differently. For one, I had already been selling the book on my own for a few years, and was essentially on the 3rd self-published edition. Because of this, they were able to see what the almost-finished product was.

I told them I would not make massive changes to the book, nor would I contort it to the AI trend (the book barely mentions AI at all), and they never pressured me once.

Their biggest contribution was their team of editors. This book has code on just about every page. I had 3 technical editors go through it, finding many bugs. How many? Let's just say "plenty".

And the feedback from the non-technical editors was, to my surprise, even more valuable. Holy crap, I cannot express to you how much they improved the book. There were several of these folks (I had no idea there were so many different specialties for editors), and all of them were great.

(They also accepted my viewpoint when I disagreed with them, immediately, every time. The final published version of the book was 100% my own words.)

From all of that, I made improvements on what must have been almost every page, and rewrote two chapters from scratch. I also added a new chapter (I volunteered for it, no one at any point pressured me to do that). The result was making a book that IMO is at least twice as good as what I was able to accomplish on my own.

I do not resonate with the article author's comments about compensation. He negotiated a pretty good deal, I think; it's not realistic to get much better than what he did, since the publisher is a business with their own expenses to pay, etc.

I was pretty disciplined about meeting deadlines that we agreed to for certain milestones. That helped my relationship with the publisher, obviously.

All in all, it was a great experience, and I am glad I did it this way.

Reading the article, it sounds like my publisher (oreilly) was better to work with than his, but I think he could have done some things differently also. In the end, though, I agree with him that it was best to walk away in his situation.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46444669

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

If are worried about the significant expense and high risk of paid ads, which is very reasonable, I recommend you do not do paid ads at all.

I think a better alternative for you is to learn to create organic content, e.g. videos for IG and tiktok, or text posts for platforms like X. And learn to stimulate sales of your app that way.

This also has a long learning curve, but dodges the financial risk of paid ads. Once your organic content is dialed in enough to make consistent profit, you'll be much better positioned to start with ads and be successful.

Good luck!

There is also the investment in learning, which would require 5-10 hours per week that whole time.

I say this because anything short of that is likely to lose money and accomplish little.

Not trying to gatekeep, so feel free to try it however you like. Maybe it is worth you trying to set up one ad just to see if you like the process enough to continue.

It depends. What kind of offer are you selling?

Generally the learning curve is massive, long, stressful and expensive. I lost tens of thousands of dollars before I could consistently make ads which were profitable.

It's not like learning coding. Imagine if every time you saw a stack trace, $250 was deducted from your bank account. Learning media buying is kind of like that.

Another path is to get hired by an ad agency. They will train you and give you a budget to manage; if you lose that budget, the worst that can happen is they'll fire you (rather than losing all your stuff).

But that would be a switch in career path, which I do not think you are asking about.