HN2new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | tannhaeuser's commentslogin

The difference is the "algorithmic" timeline (meaning ads) you get with Facebook, Insta, and co compared to the strictly chronological timeline you get on the Fediverse equivalents (Mastodon, Pixelfed). That it's less addictive, or at least not in the doom scrolling type of way, is more a consequence. Aka the enshitification argument.

Masto specifically is also a Twitter not Facebook replacement, with everyone soliloquizing past each other rather than holding a genuine conversation.

For the actual "good" Facebook use cases such as keeping in contact with school/uni veterans or other closed group, there's friendica, but it's nowhere near Fb in terms of volume.


Why are you leading your visitors to your channel on a monopolist site? To bring ad revenue? There's no need for video for your type of content in the first place.

I get it - a 2026 "hackers" campaign for binging yt. And in case you haven't noticed: appealing to the net neutrality debate of the last millenium is meaningless with just a bunch of monopolists left on the net profitting of vast public investments. The kind of thing traditionalist "hackers" in it for social recognition would be wasting their time on.


Because they're betting on the video finding its way onto people's feed, thus raising awareness among non-techy people. Hard to do that with a random website.


Complaining about net neutrality in 2026 with yt videos. What a joke by pseudo-"hackers."


It's called being pragmatic, are you going to sponsor the bandwidth needed so it can be hosted on a sustainable indie server?


please. I don't understand how the fuck we still don't have p2p social networks and private sharing groups. The amount of possibilities to f* up any kind of control are massive - it's just that we end up writing some convoluted distributed mainframe when all people need is p2prss.


In life, you have to pick your battles.


When you had gone to a site using a deep link, Safari insists on autocompleting any URL in the domain to that link you used even if you just want to go to the top-level URL/index of that site. You have to type out the entire URL and add a space at the end or something (and that still doesn't work sometimes) to stop iOS from doing that, which defeats the entire purpose of autocompletion. Btw switched off any autocorrection feature a long time ago. Still, I happen to mistype a lot compared to my old non-Apple phones (there was even an "it's not just you" article last year about it).

Apple needs to spend an entire release cycle to unfuck text entry and completion. However, with their qa lately (or lack thereof) they'd only manage to make it worse. The sad thing is they're still better than the alternatives, all things considered.


> Im guessing the answer is probably Java is why eclipse is out of favor.

Dude, Eclipse has been out of favor for well over ten years now due to Jetbrains IDEs (IntelliJ IDEA).


FIY the Wikipedia article rightfully says SGML CONCUR usage is uncommon, but compared to the stated alternatives for overlapping markup, it's basically the only one that is tolerable to use as actual markup language for use with a text editor. This is what it looks like:

    <!doctype d -- element decls for a, b ... -->
    <!doctype e -- element decls for a, x ... -->
    <(d|e)a>
      <(d)b>bla bla <(e)x>bla </(d)b> bla</(e)x>
    </(d|e)a>
where the third "bla" span is marked up with overlap.

Basically, in case you've ever wondered, SGML CONCUR is the only reason that the element name in end-element tags needs to be specified. In strictly nested markup (XML) it always must refer to the most recently opened start-element tag hence it's redundant. SGML actually has "</>" but it didn't make it into XML.


> Opus 4.5 is really good at Prolog

Anything you'd like to share? I did some research within the realm of classic robotic-like planning ([1]) and the results were impressive with local LLMs already a year ago, to the point that obtaining textual descriptions for complex enough problems became the bottleneck, suggesting that prompting is of limited use when you could describe the problem in Prolog concisely and directly already, given Prolog's NLP roots and one-to-one mapping of simple English sentences. Hence that report isn't updated to GLM 4.7, Claude whatever, or other "frontier" models yet.

[1]: https://quantumprolog.sgml.net/llm-demo/part1.html


Opus 4.5 helped me implement a basic coding agent in a DSL built on top of Prolog: https://deepclause.substack.com/p/implementing-a-vibed-llm-c.... It worked surprisingly well. With a bit of context it was able to (almost) one-shot about 500 lines of code. With older models, I felt that they "never really got it".


> No standardized strings

> ISO "strings" are just atoms or lists of single-character atoms (or lists of integer character codes) [...]. Code written with strings in SWI-Prolog will not work in [other] Prolog.

That's because SWI isn't following ISO (and even moving away from ISO in other places eg. [1]).

ISO Prolog strings are lists of character codes period. It's just that there are convenient string manipulation-like predicates operating on atom names such as sub_atom, atom_concat, atom_length, etc ([2]). You'd use atom_codes to converse between atoms/strings or use appropriate list predicates.

[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/prolog/comments/1089peh/can_someone...

[2]: https://quantumprolog.sgml.net/docs/libreference.html#string...


That's where ISO clashes with the de-facto standard of its most popular implementation, that is also the best maintained. Too bad for ISO.

... we've disagreed about this before though :)


Out of my depth here. Is that the one Tahoe was introducing? What did it solve that was impossible before?


Virtualization.framework was introduced in Big Sur. It builds on top of Hypervisor.framework and is essentially Apple's QEMU (in some ways quite literally, it implements QEMU's pvpanic protocol for example). Before QEMU and other VMMs gained ARM64 Hypervisor.framework support, it was the only way to run virtual machines on ARM Macs and still is the only official way to virtualize ARM macOS.

The new Tahoe framework you're probably thinking of is Containerization, which is a WSL2-esque wrapper around Virtualization.framework allowing for easy installation of Linux containers.


>a WSL2-esque wrapper around Virtualization.framework allowing for easy installation of Linux containers.

So Linux is now a first class citizen on both Windows and Mac? I guess it really is true that 'if you can't beat em, join em.' Jobs must be rolling in his grave.


It's well supported by the architecture. You may be interested in:

- Lima - wsl2-like access to a virtual machine https://github.com/lima-vm/lima/blob/master/README.md

- vfkit - CLI creation and management of applehv VMs https://github.com/crc-org/vfkit

- podman machine - easily run x86 containers in CoreOs, via the podman CLI https://docs.podman.io/en/latest/markdown/podman-machine.1.h...


I mean to be fair, WSL1 and WSL2 are extremely successful engineering efforts by Microsoft. I can’t imagine having to go back to the Cygwin days.


I'm one of the few I think who really liked Cygwin. Far from perfect of course, but I even still prefer it to WSL depending on what I'm doing.


Thief pretty much defined the stealth game genre, at least it did for me, where it's game over basically if you try to go all out on enemies. I may be wrong but I don't believe cleaning a level of enemies is the way forward in later levels.


You can get rid of all human enemies by knocking them unconscious (I play expert mostly so killing is forbidden anyway). But right, if you go rambo even on lower difficulty levels, you'll most likely get overwhelmed

For the rest, you're limited by supplies you buy or find but I believe it's possible to clear mostly everything if you don't miss. I know because I found myself running around the entire map to find the remaining 1% of the loot goal


> You can get rid of all human enemies by knocking them unconscious (I play expert mostly so killing is forbidden anyway). But right, if you go rambo even on lower difficulty levels, you'll most likely get overwhelmed

I can't recall if they're in Thief 1, but in Thief 2 at least there are guards with helmets which are immune to the blackjack, but afaik none of them are immune to gas arrows/mines.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: