<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: sanderjd</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=sanderjd</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2026 00:23:37 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=sanderjd" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Terrence Tao's ChatGPT Conversation about the Jacobian Conjecture Counterexample"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I dunno. To me, this seems like kind of a counterexample (pun intended?) to that thesis. Would a conversation with another AI have been as fruitful as this conversation with Tao? Certainly not! Will that change in a year? I dunno, but it seems like those goal posts keep moving, and I'm a bit skeptical.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2026 00:11:30 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49015221</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49015221</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49015221</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Back to Kagi"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I don't buy this at all. There is no way for any search provider to avoid the arms race dynamic. Marketers will always have an incentive to appear first in results in order to capture an audience to monetize. "Just win the arms race then" sounds nice but it's wishful thinking, IMO.<p>And I don't even think this is the primary issue with the web sucking. The web is just an entirely different thing than it was during the period we're all nostalgic for. I used to search for information and find it on independent pages that I never would have found without a search engine. But now that same information I used to search for is all on wikipedia, with much better citations than I used to get.<p>And pretty much everything other use case of search is now behind some social media walled garden.<p>IMO the web was kind of just a victim of its own success. There stopped being much incentive to put new things on the web on a huge proliferation of independent sites.<p>(NB. This is terrible for Google! If my take on this is right, then their business model is going to eventually be in real trouble. This is another reason I'm pretty skeptical that they have caused this to happen. It's bad for them, I don't think they're happy about it at all.)</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2026 20:13:08 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49012726</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49012726</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49012726</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Back to Kagi"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The thing those emails demonstrate is not the thing I'm skeptical of!</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2026 20:04:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49012625</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49012625</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49012625</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Back to Kagi"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I'm not saying it isn't both, what I'm saying is that the thesis of the newer Google competitors is that the problem is mostly that Google has chosen to suck, so they can do a lot better just by choosing to not suck. But I think that thesis is wrong, that it is mostly that the web sucks now, and that these search engines are ultimately likely to be unsatisfying because they can't actually solve that underlying problem.<p>But if I'm wrong, that would be great! The comment that started this thread made me think that it seems like I'm not wrong though.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2026 17:37:09 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49010461</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49010461</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49010461</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Back to Kagi"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Yes I agree. I don't begrudge competitors trying to do better at search at all. Maybe they'll succeed. I've just always been skeptical that they will be able to make significant progress on this problem, because I think the problem is ultimately garbage in garbage out.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2026 15:46:25 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49008659</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49008659</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49008659</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Back to Kagi"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This is the thesis, I understand the thesis, I remain skeptical of it. In my view, search sucks now primarily because there just isn't much worth searching for on the open web anymore. I think the "it's Google's fault" thesis is mostly an unwillingness to admit this.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2026 15:42:47 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49008607</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49008607</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49008607</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Back to Kagi"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>But this is also why Google "sucks now". The thesis of these competitors was that Google got worse because of bad product decisions or implementation failures. But I found that to be a very questionable thesis from the start.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2026 14:13:49 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49007181</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49007181</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49007181</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Who's afraid of Chinese models?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I think he's creating a definition for an abstract thing here, and using the word "intelligence" to represent that abstract thing.<p>In your analogy, the "CRUD app" is analogous to the car, but that's not what Thompson is defining to be the unit of "intelligence". He's saying that some number of units of "intelligence" are necessary to create that CRUD app, somewhat analogously to how some number of units of energy are necessary to create a car.<p>But I agree with you that this concept of a "unit of intelligence" that he's using is probably too abstract to ever be usefully well defined.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2026 01:13:17 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49000574</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49000574</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49000574</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Claude Is Not a Compiler"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>12?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2026 15:54:20 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48993994</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48993994</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48993994</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Who's afraid of Chinese models?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Yeah I bumped on this as well. Contra the author's claim, the analogy to energy commodities seems very direct to me. Natural gas is not useful in and of itself, what is useful is the energy or aggregates created from it, and those have very different levels of efficiency. Exactly like Sol more efficiently converting tokens into intelligence than Kimi, a combined cycle gas plant converts gas into electricity more efficiently than a simple cycle gas plant. But this does not imply that gas is not a commodity. And both the more efficient and less efficient kinds of plants have large markets; they just target different trade offs.<p>Edit to add: I think what he's saying is more like "tokens aren't the interesting commodity, 'intelligence' is", which makes more sense. To carry on my gas and electricity analogy, I would say the same thing about gas being the less interesting commodity than electricity, because electricity can be used for a broader set of useful things. But both things are commodities, despite one being an input and the other being an output in this case, and the conversion efficiency is one very important consideration, but not the only one.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2026 15:44:14 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48993853</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48993853</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48993853</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Claude Is Not a Compiler"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Each year, as the models improve, we add one more "very".</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2026 15:22:05 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48993483</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48993483</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48993483</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Why is it so hard for the U.S. to win wars?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Yeah fair enough, there's always someone saying anything :) But my sense is that this is not a commonly held view.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2026 00:40:06 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48986767</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48986767</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48986767</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Why is it so hard for the U.S. to win wars?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>No it wasn't. That wasn't even the second pretext they tried to convince us of, it was like the third or fourth one.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2026 23:01:58 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48985969</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48985969</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48985969</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Why is it so hard for the U.S. to win wars?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This "definition of war" reasoning is circular. It's not that these are not wars because Congress didn't declare them, it's that they are wars that are being waged illegally, at odds with the Constitution.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2026 15:34:54 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48980330</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48980330</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48980330</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Why is it so hard for the U.S. to win wars?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Who is crying about that? You just mean the administration? If so, then sure. But Americans at large aren't under any illusions about whether anyone would or should be helping with this.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2026 15:31:27 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48980275</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48980275</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48980275</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Why is it so hard for the U.S. to win wars?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>You are the one in this thread who comes off as gullible. You seem to have bought the post-facto and baldly pretextual narrative that the war both had the objective of delivering Iran of nuclear capability and is achieving that objective.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2026 15:24:48 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48980186</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48980186</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48980186</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Benchmarking coding agents on Databricks' multi-million line codebase"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I keep hesitating to use Pi because I primarily use Claude and I worry it will be much more expensive to pay for API usage rather than the bundled subscription usage. But I haven't actually evaluated the cost tradeoff. Should I get over this hesitance and dive into Pi?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2026 13:29:08 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48845509</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48845509</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48845509</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Apple to increase spend with Broadcom to produce billions more U.S. chips"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Impeachment and removal as the primary remedy for executive overreach is - and always was - wishful thinking. We need a fundamentally less powerful executive.<p>This is most obvious with the pardon power. In the debate about its inclusion, the argument was "well if a president uses that power corruptly, they will be impeached". But no, that was wishful thinking. The same is true of "emergency" tariff powers and a bunch of other things.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2026 20:19:32 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48836930</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48836930</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48836930</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Apple to increase spend with Broadcom to produce billions more U.S. chips"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The biggest problem with the tariff policy is not the cost or even the uncertainty, it's the corruption. A single person should not have the power to dictate the terms of trade, because the rational play in such a system is for businesses that rely on trade to pander to that person, and that's corrupt.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2026 12:51:25 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48831276</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48831276</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48831276</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by sanderjd in "Maybe you should learn something"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This makes sense but I don't think it works for me. I get irritable when I'm trying to do something like the activities you listed, if I can't focus on what I'm doing without interruption, and then that's bad for everyone, both the interruptee and the interruptor. This seems to be a personality thing (disorder?), my wife seems to be able to switch back and forth from working to parenting without it affecting her ability to perform on either task.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2026 16:53:56 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48786867</link><dc:creator>sanderjd</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48786867</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48786867</guid></item></channel></rss>