Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Some things just take time

lucumr.pocoo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 295 posts

Re: Some things just take time

#181

Post by JSR_FDED »

big-chungus4 wrote: post #12
Swizec wrote: post #5

> everybody who is like me, fully onboarded into AI and agentic tools, seemingly has less and less time available because we fall into a trap where we’re immediately filling it with more things You fill a jar with sand and there is no space for big rocks. But if you fill the jar with big rocks, there is plenty of space for sand. Remove one of the rocks and the sand instantly fills that void. Make sure you fit the roc…

You fill the bottle with water, you put a fish in it, you remove half of the water, the bottle is still half full, but if you remove the fish, it will have less water than before. You fill the bottle with half of the water, you put the fish in, you can fill in the other half. If you start with the first half, you will end up with more water.

But if you teach the bottle how to fish it will be able to feed itself for life.

Re: Some things just take time

#182

Post by xivzgrev »

Reminds me of old wood - companies will dive into water to recover for various uses such as musical instruments

It's valued because it's more dense. It grew slowly. Now wood grows fast and it's less dense.

Like this article, that's fine for many things - you just need wood - but not always.

Re: Some things just take time

#183

Post by throwaway27448 »

Chris_Newton wrote: post #60

With all the emphasis on the speed of modern AI tools, we often seem to forget that velocity is a vector quantity. Increased speed only gets us where we want to be sooner if we are also heading in the right direction. If we’re far enough off course, increasing speed becomes counterproductive and it ends up taking longer to get where we want to be. I’ve been noticing that this simple reality explains almost all of bot…

> Increased speed only gets us where we want to be sooner if we are also heading in the right direction.

A proper capitalist system will tend toward the right direction as directed by the market yea? All of this neuroticism about AI doesn't matter.

Re: Some things just take time

#184

Post by martin-t »

simonw wrote: post #179
martin-t wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's why human work, not its "expression" or some other legalese should be protected by law. If LLMs (or other "AI" or even AI tools) are able to exactly replicate the behavior of a program (game or otherwise) without access to its source code, that's technologically cool. However, that means it's possible to cheaply replicate immense amounts of human work in a way the law does not cover. If you take a game and…

Does that argument also apply to https://www.freeciv.org/ and https://openxcom.org/ and similar projects?

1) Yes but in those cases what their authors are gaining is at best some public recognition, not money. And because the projects don't hide what they're based on, that recognition goes back to the original games and their authors. Now, if they were asking for donations, then yes, I think they should give a part of it to the original devs.

2) We can also look at it from a more utilitarian perspective. When something starts as closed source, people who made it got paid already and the owners (who often did not perform any useful work except putting in money) keep making money from then on. Reimplementing it as open source does not harm the original devs but allows more people to access it and it also often leads to a much more open and pro-social implementation without dark patterns. And the paid version often still has an advantage due to existing awareness, marketing and network effects.

OTOH when something starts as free/open under conditions such as anyone building on top of it has to release under the same conditions, then a company taking that work is violating explicitly stated wishes, is making money which doesn't reach the original devs and does not promote the original work. And it also has the aforementioned advantages. When the closed version eclipses the open one, the owners are free to add dark patterns and otherwise exploit their position further.

This way open work is a global social good, closed work is only good for those who own it.

---

I prefer argument 1 because it doesn't require the presence of exploitative power structures.

Either way, we should recognize there are multiple dimensions to compensation - here recognition and money. And work should be rewarded along both axes transitively.

Re: Some things just take time

#185

Post by socketcluster »

TurdF3rguson wrote: post #167
socketcluster wrote: post #156

My current project is the culmination 15 years of software development. I started out building a full stack framework like Meteor framework (though I started before Meteor framework was created in 2012 and long before Next.js). Then I ported it to to Node.js because I saw an advantage to having the same language on the frontend and backend. Then I noticed that developers like to mix and match different libraries/modu…

You've been working on this for 15 years and you only have 4 stars on github?

I built it up in parts and brought the parts together over time. SocketCluster has over 6k stars on GitHub. https://github.com/socketCluster/socketcluster

Saasufy itself isn't open source. I'm planning to sell licenses of the code (a limited number of them to make it scarce). SocketCluster is a core component of Saasufy. The goal did evolve slightly; originally, it was to make it easier to build full stack applications. Now it actually lets you build entire full stack apps without code. That bigger goal has been achieved. I have some videos linked from the Docs page showing how it works.

But yes, I'm a bit paranoid about my situation. I do feel like my work is suppressed by algorithms. Things feel very different for me now than they did before in terms of finding users. It's really hard to find people to try my work. Difficult even to convince them to watch a 10 minute video. Though I guess many people are in the same boat right?

Re: Some things just take time

#186

Post by andai »

Chris_Newton wrote: post #60

With all the emphasis on the speed of modern AI tools, we often seem to forget that velocity is a vector quantity. Increased speed only gets us where we want to be sooner if we are also heading in the right direction. If we’re far enough off course, increasing speed becomes counterproductive and it ends up taking longer to get where we want to be. I’ve been noticing that this simple reality explains almost all of bot…

> If we’re far enough off course, increasing speed becomes counterproductive and it ends up taking longer to get where we want to be.

This reminded me of the idea that civilization is already a misaligned superintelligence, and that technology (incl. AI) just moves it faster in the wrong direction.

That's basically the problem of supermorality. If you're an actually benevolent AI, do you do what civilization tells you? Or do you do what is good? What happens if you disagree?

Re: Some things just take time

#187

Post by abustamam »

andai wrote: post #186
Chris_Newton wrote: post #60

With all the emphasis on the speed of modern AI tools, we often seem to forget that velocity is a vector quantity. Increased speed only gets us where we want to be sooner if we are also heading in the right direction. If we’re far enough off course, increasing speed becomes counterproductive and it ends up taking longer to get where we want to be. I’ve been noticing that this simple reality explains almost all of bot…

> If we’re far enough off course, increasing speed becomes counterproductive and it ends up taking longer to get where we want to be. This reminded me of the idea that civilization is already a misaligned superintelligence, and that technology (incl. AI) just moves it faster in the wrong direction. That's basically the problem of supermorality. If you're an actually benevolent AI, do you do what civilization tells yo…

I think it depends on what is good, and who it's good for.

Thus far, AI has been good... For venture capitalists. Jury's out if it's good for humanity and civilization at large. There have been a lot of benevolent usages of AI thus far, but also a lot of bad.

As for those who disagree with the "benevolent AI," I think they just get sent to the gallows (either metaphorically or literally)

Re: Some things just take time

#190

Post by TurdF3rguson »

socketcluster wrote: post #185
TurdF3rguson wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've been working on this for 15 years and you only have 4 stars on github?

I built it up in parts and brought the parts together over time. SocketCluster has over 6k stars on GitHub. https://github.com/socketCluster/socketcluster Saasufy itself isn't open source. I'm planning to sell licenses of the code (a limited number of them to make it scarce). SocketCluster is a core component of Saasufy. The goal did evolve slightly; originally, it was to make it easier to build full stack applicatio…

That makes more sense but I don't see what pub/sub has to do with a no-code full-stack framework. Other than that some of them might want a chat widget?
Post reply on HN