<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: shikwasa</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=shikwasa</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2026 00:33:16 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=shikwasa" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by shikwasa in "Infidel goes wild"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Just want to say thank you for the absolutely amazing and generous comment! :)</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2026 07:39:10 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49961797</link><dc:creator>shikwasa</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49961797</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49961797</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by shikwasa in "CSS Bed: Classless CSS themes to use as starting points in web development"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I understand the "starting point" part but I find the emphasis on "classless" interesting: you basically have to introduce a non-element selector as soon as you want make even the smallest layout change.<p>For anything beyond a single page document, I find something like matcha.css (<a href="https://matcha.mizu.sh" rel="nofollow">https://matcha.mizu.sh</a>, you can even pick your custom build on the same page) a practical starting point if you want to stay close to the elements.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2026 04:41:29 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49929907</link><dc:creator>shikwasa</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49929907</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49929907</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by shikwasa in "Why do we need human mathematicians anymore?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The <i>absence</i> of such relationships given here are so many species is exactly the point being made by the author: there is no data to show that it would be safe, let along good, for us to surrender decision making to some more intelligent entity.<p>> I would expect that in the vast majority of combinations, those n species are not intelligent enough to make decisions for another species...<p>This kind of statement is very difficult to build discussions upon (not a criticism). "Vast majority", "intelligent enough" are both very difficult to quantify and there is too much subjectivity involved.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2026 02:17:19 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49796045</link><dc:creator>shikwasa</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49796045</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49796045</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by shikwasa in "Why do we need human mathematicians anymore?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I think the quoted part is saying that given n species and the n * (n - 1) binary combinations possible, there are no examples of the said observation. It doesn't suggest "the set of intelligent species only [has] one member".</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2026 06:22:31 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49783657</link><dc:creator>shikwasa</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49783657</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49783657</guid></item></channel></rss>