even focusing on age-related death, you assume that such treatment is one-and-done deal instead of continuous pharmaceutical life support
So they won't be immortal for too long.
Readit Newsnarag commented on Some users report their Firefox browser is scoffing CPU power theregister.com/2025/08/1... · Posted by u/homarp
I had to disable yet another feature in about:config last week, something related to AI, not sure if it's the same. Startup and first load of many pages were painfully slow.
Some good points, bad logic. The fact that you can't effectively measure something doesn't mean that something doesn't exist.
Individual productivity exists.
Maybe it's easier to measure groups' productivity? Probably.
"Business impact"? I don't think so, that later concept seems much more arbitrary. But feel free to look for the keys under the lamplight. If you choose that metrics, you're not going to retain many extra productive people anyway.
The old problem: judging the work of an expert is very difficult if you lack comparable expertise. I can give you advice, but I can't make you smart to accept it. How could you tell if I'm a genius or an overconfident asshole?
Disclaimer: I can't really vouch for any of this, but let me tell you what's being discussed in the press over here.
This is Government's version and it shows.
REE boss was put there by the ruling party. Still they try to paint REE as a private operator now. It's not. Like many other orgs, it's a mix of private and public capital, ultimately controled by the government.
It's suspected that the blackout was caused because she overruled technicians' opinion, looking for a solar % record.
Not "enough thermal power stations" carefully avoids mentioning nuclear, that they want to erradicate.
Private companies are requesting the records of CECOEL conversation to be published, some have leaked their logs. In one of those, REE technicians readily admit that oscilations are caused by not enough nuclear in the mix.
narag commented on Tell HN: Help restore the tax deduction for software dev in the US (Section 174) · Posted by u/dang
That's nuts, since a payroll should never be considered an asset. That's trying to put a material value on software, and doing it based on the salaries of developers is as crazy as valuing it in lines of code.
The value of software could be based on something more realistic, like a percentage of actual revenue, but I suppose tech giants would be against that.
That's trying to put a material value on software, and doing it based on the salaries of developers is as crazy as valuing it in lines of code.
I'm not sure if depreciation is the same concept as we call amortización in my country: capital that counts as investment instead of expenses because you're expected to keep extracting value from it over the years, so you can't get a deduction for the whole expense when you first pay for it.
If that's what this is about, it's absurd not for the reason you say (salaries are not a bad proxy for value, since you expect the profit will be greater) but because you'll probably keep paying for maintenance and evolving the software.
narag commented on Giant planet discovered orbiting tiny star ucl.ac.uk/news/2025/jun/g... · Posted by u/gnabgib
The planet (TOI-6894b) is a low-density gas giant with a radius a little larger than Saturn’s but with only ~50% of Saturn’s mass.
IIRC Saturn has very low density, was it lower than water? (IOW it would float) so this would be even lighter.
narag commented on There should be no Computer Art (1971) dam.org/museum/essays_ui/... · Posted by u/glimshe
My impression is that the author's underlying position, which happens among other things to lead him to the conclusion that "there should be no computer art", is that art should be subordinate to politics.
"There is no need for the production of more works of art [...] Aesthetic information as such is interesting only for the rich and the ruling. [...] Thus, the interest in computers and art should be the investigation of aesthetic information as part of the investigation of communication. This investigation should be directed by the needs of the people. [...] We should be interested in producing a film on, say, the distribution of wealth. Such a film is interesting because of its content; the interest in the content is enhanced by an aesthetically satisfying presentation."
That is: to the author, the purpose of art is simply to enhance the presentation of something whose primary purpose is political.
It may be that the author's position isn't specifically about politics as such: he might say, rather, that art should be subordinate to morals, that making art is only valuable in so far as it furthers some other goal that has value in itself, which might or might not be political. But the specific examples in this article are political.
The author does evidently have some other more specific reasons for being skeptical about "computer art". He says that "the repertoire of results of aesthetic behaviour has not been changed by the use of computers" (which might be true, or might be false now but have been true in 1971, but he offers no evidence or arguments for it). He says that "outsiders from technology" are invading the art world without understanding its political situation and "surrendering to the given 'laws of the market'" rather than rebelling against commercialism as real artists should. He says that technology in general, and computers in particular, worsen "the alienation of the artist from his product". Two of these reasons are also political but do engage with the specifics of "computer art" as such. But I think his main reason is the overarching super-general political one: there should be no computer art, because there should be no art as such, because there should only be anti-capitalist political activism which will sometimes use art as a tool.
So far as I can tell, the guts of this argument -- art, in practice, is driven by the rich and powerful, artists should reject this and focus on serving the greater need to overthrow the system with those rich and powerful people at the top and replace it with something fairer, therefore such-and-such an idea in art-as-such is a distraction -- could be transplanted without loss to any moment in the history of art and any particular artistic idea or technique or movement.
Maybe that or something like it is right, but my bet is that in practice the human race is enriched by having some people in it who create art because they love creating art, for whom other concerns are secondary.
(Having said all of which, so far as I can tell the author is basically correct about "computer art" not having contributed much aesthetically, and if he'd written more about that it could have been very interesting. And he might be correct about technology increasing the separation between artists and what they produce, and about that being a bad thing, and if he'd written more about that it could also have been interesting.)
It may be that the author's position isn't specifically about politics as such: he might say, rather, that art should be subordinate to morals...
That has been the default option for large historic periods, when organized religions were the main source of funds. I don't believe the author would appreciate being in that company.
This other guy was the author of the text book when I had to study that subject:
The article complains that most movies follow the same plot:
We meet the protagonist in their ordinary world, then an inciting incident changes everything, they are pulled into a new quest, meet someone who shows them a different way of being, they struggle with a powerful antagonist, and in the end the protagonist either triumphs or fails tragically.
HN to the rescue! What are some movies that do NOT follow this plot?
In biology one thing is made similar to other ("assimilated") in order to absorb it. In the same way, some ideas are packed in some format known to be easy to digest.
The trick in this topic is how dissimilar to some vague canon should a story be to qualify for an answer to your question.
Would you say Alien is a good example?
How much of the extra power has gone to graphics?
Most of it?
Huh?
Also, at least in Spain, some delivery companies are awful. I have a package delivered to a convenience store right now. They refuse to give it to me because I have no delivery key. The courier didn't send it to me. I try to get assistance in their web... and they ask me the key that I want them to give me. Nice, huh?
I asked for a refund to the shop. They have ghosted me in the chat, their return form doesn't work. Their email addresses are no-reply. The contact form doesn't work either. Now I need to wait until Monday to phone them.
I know the shop is legit. They're just woefully incompetent and don't know they are or think that's the way things work.
For cheap and not too expensive products, Amazon just works. No "but I went to your house and there was nobody there" bullshit. No questions return policy.