Imagine being in the middle of nowhere, in winter, on Saturday night, on some farm, knee deep in a cow piss, servicing some 3rd party feed dispenser, only to discover that you have possible solution but it's in some obscure format instead of .tar.gz. Nearest internet 60 miles away. This is what I always imagine happening when some new obscure format come into play, imagine the poor fella, alone, cold, screaming. So incredibly close to his goal, but ultimately stopped by some artificial unnecessary made-up bullshit.
I'm not sure that argument holds here, not every solution in programming is equally good just because. A <progress> element has the advantage of semantically actually representing a progress bar, which improves accessibility and who knows what other browser behavior and heuristics. In general you should try to use semantically correct HTML tags unless you have a really good reason not to. Maybe in this case he couldn't get the appearance he wanted using <progress>, which would be an acceptable reason.
Obviously this is nitpicking and this UI was made for fun rather than being a serious library intended for production. But that's a different criticism of the GP than the one you made.
It's released with an MIT license so you're free to made any "improvements" you see fit to make. Fork away my friend. Then come back and do a Show HN with a full and complete write up for every little decision you've made. Not just you, but anyone else in this thread that needs to know.
Not every question is a criticism that needs to be defended against. The person you're responding to could very well just like to know the reason if one exists, no more, no less.
If you know a better way to get that info than asking the question, I'm all ears.
(major digression ahead)
This is actually something I've been digging into for a while, trying to improve my own communication. My own current best answer for this sort of situation is the social expectation is that a neutral question will always be accompanied by praise and gratitude, and any question asked that lacks that accompaniment will be interpreted as antagonistic.
For example, the comment you're responding too could have started with "This looks really cool, ..." or "Wow, this takes me back..." or "I can see a lot of effort went into this..." and it would have resulted in the question coming off as neutral instead of critical to some people.
What's fascinating is when I mention this kind of thing I almost always get one of two responses
* Of course that's how it works, everyone knows that!
* That's ridiculous, no one can be expected to do that!
I think I'm more cynical. Almost everything stated on the internet will be perceived as antagonistic. At least by some. It's more a representation of the reader's internal state rather than an issue with the question / statement. Unless, of course, the question / statement is overtly antagonistic.
It's definitely not just on the internet, I've been working for years to learn how to not upset people for asking reasonable and genuine questions IRL. It's a real struggle to this day to notice I'm failing to engage in the social ritual correctly and come up with appropriate extra positivity on the spot just so I can be considered a non-antagonist.
I think internalization is important for self improvement, so I admire the way you frame this. Try not to downplay the other part's role, though. They are also making a choice in the exchange.
To be fair, software discussions in particular are absolutely overflowing with snark, reflexive dismissals, and just general one-upmanship. So I can understand people assuming the worst.
A mother of a teenage son is talking to her husband about introducing an important topic to their son. To make it less shocking, she suggests using an analogy like butterflies. So, the father goes to the son's room.
- "Son, do you remember last year when we went camping?"
- "Yeah, I remember that."
- "And do you remember when we set up the tent by the river?"
- "Yeah, I remember."
- "And do you remember when those two women set up their tent next to ours?"
- "Yeah, I remember."
- "And do you remember that one night when they visited our tent and what we were doing with them?"
- "Yeah, I remember."
- "Well, you see, butterflies do it in a very similar way."
"It's actually not that similar, since butterflies are oviparous, and have ZW sexual determination" - my nerdy high school self completely missing the joke.
I assume it's a relief for parents when their offspring realise a few sentences in that this is The Conversation and they cut to the chase. "Yes mother/ father, I do understand roughly how human sexual reproduction works, and I have been taught about consent, so we're all good right?"
When my son was in preschool, I went to pick him up one day and the teacher took me aside and said, "we were reading a story about a mom and how she had a baby in her tummy, and your son raised his hand and said, 'That's not true. It's in her uterus!'"
I've never had "the talk" with him, I talked to him continuously through his childhood. As he asked questions, I gave him answers.
Kids sometimes think they know something, but really don't. You get different stories from a friend's older brother, a coming of age movie, porn, etc. You can't make any assumptions or leave room for interpretation here, so you should still have "The Talk™".
Yes, this is how frequency-doubled lasers work (eg. 532 nm green laser pointers, which are generated as a harmonic from a 1064 nm Nd:YVO4 laser by a nonlinear KTP crystal).
This rss is not exactly an rss with articles from the main page, but a newsletter I send manually every few days once enough significant stories happen to warrant an email. Each newsletter issue includes 2-5 main articles and 3-7 trending articles.
As an RSS user, I would love an RSS of the main page content, one entry per story over 5.5 is a perfectly reasonable baseline.
Also: It'd be great if you had a feed tag in your HTML head, so RSS readers could pick it up straight out of your homepage URL instead of needing to manually hunt for the right RSS link.
100% the current implementation is "RSS as would be desired by newsletter lovers", but there is already the newsletter for that. If I want batching or similar my reader will handle that, I think it would be best just to have items as they happen appear on the feed.
I know it's not going to be popular, but to cover the cost of running ChatGPT on that many articles, I made it a part of a premium subscription: https://www.newsminimalist.com/premium#rss
Do you need realtime results, or is an ongoing queue of article analysis good enough? Have you considered running your own hardware with a frontier MoE model like deepseek v3? It can be done for relatively low cost on CPU depending on your inference speed needs. Maybe a hybrid approach could at least reduce your API spend?
source: I run inference locally and built the server for around $6k. I get upwards of 10t/s on deepseek v3
PS: thank you for running this service. I've been using it casually since launch and find it much better for my mental health than any other source of news I've tried in the past.
Thank you so much! Always glad to see long-time readers.
There was a period when I considered switching to an open-source model, but every time I was ready for a switch, OpenAI released a smarter and often cheaper model that was just too good to pass up.
Eventually I decided that the potential savings are not worth it in the long term - it looks like LLMs will only get cheaper over time and the cost of inference should become negligible.
Thanks for the reply!
This is perhaps not so much a Hacker News type question since this place is very VC focused, but have you considered publishing any papers on your system? I think it would make a fascinating and valuable bit of research.
Or, even farther off the deep-end: have you considered open-sourcing any old versions of your prompts or pipeline? Say one year after they are superseded in your production system?
I've been writing "font-family: sans-serif" when I wanted user preferred font without serifs and "monospace" for user preferred monospace font. Is that not the correct way?
Depends heavily on what you mean with ”user preferred”. Approximately 0% of users will have made an active choice on what sans-serif typeface they prefer.
I tried to change browser defaults before, but that made some sites look strange because developer’s assumptions about defaults were merged with the design.
Today when I want to change the font, I just add a per-site StyleBot rule.
reply