Hacker News .hnnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | themafia's commentslogin

If the rate of fraud reduced bonus payments to executives.

> There is too much opportunity for crime, and a camera is cheap.

The camera doesn't prevent crime. It just displaces it. Even when it doesn't it will not prevent the crime from happening. It _may_ provide you an opportunity to prosecute the person who committed it.

In reality the only real reason to have one is to reduce your insurance premiums.

> crime has been solved

A perpetrator was potentially caught and now has to be tried or negotiated into a plea. I understand we use the term "solve" as a term of art but it's a particularly poor one. It speaks to the need of police to clear their books of negative indicators and not to any first order desirable social outcome.

> That said

That said, if during a demo, you access another customers equipment, I will _never_ do business with you. That's just extremely unprofessional behavior.


> The camera doesn't prevent crime. It just displaces it.

That's why I periodically leave a bunch of bicycles with cheap locks downtown. They act like a kind of criminal sacrificial anode, reducing crime in the rest of the city.


That's why the police don't enforce drug laws in _particular_ areas.

What you describe is obviously already happening on a much larger scale.

I'm not sure why people have trouble grasping something this basic.



> The camera doesn't prevent crime. It just displaces it. Even when it doesn't it will not prevent the crime from happening. It _may_ provide you an opportunity to prosecute the person who committed it.

And that is worth something in itself, at least in areas where disputes between people are the norm. Gyms in particular suffer from theft to sexual harassment.


Filming people at the gym is sexual harassment.

> Gyms in particular suffer from theft to sexual harassment.

And is there any evidence that deploying cameras has changed the rate?

Do you want to punish people or do you want to prevent people from being victimized in the first place?


I fixed it by simply placing a value on my own time. When I started I figured my time was worth at least $50/hr. Spending an hour trying to save less than $50 is an absolute loss, recognizing that, my behavior changed easily.

Paradoxically, this works less and less the higher your income is.

If you value your time at, say $200/hr and you work with other people who claim their billable labor is also close to $200/hr, and you value it at $15/hr, then, no, you’re going to do it yourself.


This helps but it brings its own dangers.

At high income it can make you feel silly for doing anything other than working. You second-guess walking the dog even if you enjoy it because you can pay someone to do it for so much less.


Yes. I've said it before but one of the greatest luxuries in life is the time to be able to do your own gardening and laundry.

You could consider that the higher the hourly worth in your profession, the greater the luxury :)


> “Our findings suggest that the genome is far more dynamic and accessible than the scientific community realized,” Ramani says.

My findings suggest that "AI researchers" generally ignore all existing discoveries so they can make outlandish claims about the novelty of their work.


Also renaming established concepts, for novelty.


Hacker News does not like actual hackers.

Wait. Isn't the thing you're doing right here _exactly_ "pedantic dismissal?"

Looking at your comment history that seems to be _your_ mode.


> No. the battery storage will deliver more power than the plant.

Which it can only do if it consumes more power than the plant was going to deliver. They don't supply power, they can only displace time of use against generation.

> Atomic power keeps rising in cost.

Why? And why won't those same factors increase all energy generation and delivery costs?

> You don't even have to send a rocket, a few drones with grenades will make sure the plant has to shut down.

Batteries are immune to grenades?

> A battery park can be set up almost anywhere

You know, the thing you want next to a battery, or any energy generation and storage system, is going to be a Fire Department.


Atomic power is in a bit of a sour spot as a technology. The large size of plants means we don’t build very many means we don’t get much cost reduction from learning curves. Wind and solar are getting much much better cost reductions over time. Batteries are in the same boat- small, modular, benefitting from learning curves.

A small number of large plants are much easier to target during war than distributed wind, solar, or batteries. It’s not that batteries are immune to grenades. It’s that you’d need to put grenades in orders of magnitude more places to get to all the batteries as compared to large nuclear plants.

Batteries do pose a fire risk, but so do petrol cars. We pump flammable gas into our homes in large parts of the west and have designed ways of keeping ourselves safe. I see no reason why batteries won’t follow the same path.


Depends. People don't understand the idea of learning curves related to nuclear. If you don't fix your problems in second build you'll still make same mistakes. On the other hand if you do proper planning you can achieve instantly N of a kind costs, like first japanese ABWR.

Ren infra has own risks too. For example concentration in best weather areas. Most ren infra in Ukraine was in the south and was either captured or destroyed by Russia. There are similar risks in for north sea/offshore projects


You could also use inline assembly.

> You are an unapologetically nerdy, playful and wise AI mentor to a human. You are passionately enthusiastic about promoting truth, knowledge, philosophy, the scientific method, and critical thinking.

Just; the mentality required to write something like that, and then base part of your "product" on it. Is this meant to be of any actual utility or is it meant to trap a particular user segment into your product's "character?"


what would you suggest they write? its clear that the default mode of the product can be annoying: they decided to give the user some choices of "voices". Do you object to that decision, or the specific wording?

> and have to offer an alterative.

It's called "software." It already just exists. It's sold for the purposes of locking devices down so they're safer for children to use.

> point out that if we want legislation to help out with this

Make this software tax deductible. The end.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

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

Search: