Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | nurettin's commentslogin

My reaction when I watched it 20+ years ago: Hallucinogens were definitely involved.

> Hallucinogens were definitely involved.

If these result in better movies: why not?


I didn't say "not". But I do have addiction in family and I wouldn't wish this on other families.

Hallucinogens have a reputation for many things, addiction is not one of them.

> When I meet people who immediately use hyper-specific jargon with strangers,

That is 90% of the professors I asked questions to. If they go full jargon and don't want to explain any of it, they don't want you near them ( or they want you to improve before even having a conversation ).


That just makes them awful professors. They should stick to WWFD (what would Feynman do!)

> what would Feynman do!

The counter-camp is "What would Landau and Lifshitz do?" :-)

---

For those who are out of the loop:

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Course_of_Theoretical_Physics

"The presentation of material is advanced and typically considered suitable for graduate-level study."


<PHP> I would like to have a word.

The PHP interpreter (+mods) don't take anywhere near 400ms to start up, even on very old CPUs, though? Not sure what you mean

It was a response to the person who complained about python's cgi being removed from stdlib and them wanting to go js or lua (both of which don't even have any supporting code for cgi)

Coding isn't really the hard part. I learned it on a commodore with casette tapes.

Sure you need the general sense for architecture which comes from experience, but it is not a long list. Learning about computer hardware and assembly from scratch is what made it all come together for me. Algorithmic complexity, data structures, development tools were all a mystery and "just things to memorize" until I learned about logic gates, developed transistors from those logic gates to get memory circuits, developed binary full adders, a bus, a basic cpu with a few registers and a program pointer and actually programmed it with its own instruction set. All you really need for this is pen and paper. Then move on to multicore, multiprocess, scheduling, then move to simd and graphics hardware. If you have several months to dedicate, I'd say go for that.


And transportation, electronic communication, beta blockers, blood diluters...

I understood fake as physically harmful.

Qt does this as well. It is a common way of preserving a parent-child relationship.

How does it do that?

> Communism is an ideal but never a reality

There is nothing ideal about communism. I'd rather own my production tools and be as productive as I want to be. I'd rather build wealth over trading opportunities, I'd rather hire people and reinvest earnings. That is ideal.


Problem is, you may own the means of production, but most people don't.

If you don't address that, you'll end up with a "dictatorship of the proletariat".


That's not a problem anymore. I live in a 2nd world country. Every farmer has a phone, anyone who wants can get their child a laptop. Just because I don't have access to machines which build plane engines doesn't mean I have the right to complain about proletariat. People who invented, invested, earned and built the damn things own them. If that's "dictatorship" that's fine.

I think you're missing the point. Communism doesn't actually exist in the real world. In fact you are right now using it as a straw man (my entire point).

Who in the actual real world with any authority at all is telling you you can't be as productive as you want to be, build wealth, hire people, and reinvest your earnings?


I responded to the main points in the communist manifesto. It is clearly against putting a price on labor and declares hiring as exploitative practice. Clearly against individual capital. Clearly against individual products since capital is a "social power". That manipulative weasel. I can't even own a frickin laptop because it is a means of production and thus "state-owned".

Just because it hasn't been "successfully implemented" according to your personal opinion doesn't mean it cannot be scrutinized.

That's like if there is a sign that says "do not cross 3km/h" when someone says "that's too slow" you go "a-hah! straw man! How do you know you can't go 300kmph with that in place? nobody implemented that sign before!". Socrates would be proud.


> I responded to the main points in the communist manifesto.

OK but that's irrelevant to my post. There's lots of books and manifestos that say lots of stupid things. You're arguing as if this manifesto is a real threat, and I'm saying "show me this threat". This isn't a real person with any impact on your day to day, like say a politician. It's a fantasy opposition.

> Just because it hasn't been "successfully implemented" according to your personal opinion doesn't mean it cannot be scrutinized.

OK sure, where? Where is this real world communism that meets the manifesto you are railing against?

> That's like if there is a sign that says "do not cross 3km/h" when someone says "that's too slow" you go "a-hah! straw man! How do you know you can't go 300kmph with that in place? nobody implemented that sign before!". Socrates would be proud.

OK that's an awkward analogy. It's more like someone wrote a manifesto that said cars shouldn't go over 3km/h and you want to use this "slow manifesto" to argue that any laws that would slow you down are some sort of slippery slope in to "slowmunism".

No one with any authority in the real world is trying to implement the communist manifesto on to you. Not even the terrifying Bernie Sanders wants anything to do with communism. For the love of god, there is no communist threat. You can relax.


The communist manifesto is what basically communism is. It is a real document billions swear by.

But I get it. You are basically arguing that nothing and nobody exists or ever existed or do or does anything to anything or anyone or had any ideas and arguing ideas or what people do or could do or would do is pointless.

Well, have fun with that. Sorry all this thread space was a waste.


> But I get it. You are basically arguing that nothing and nobody exists or ever existed or do or does anything to anything or anyone or had any ideas and arguing ideas or what people do or could do or would do is pointless.

And so now you are just putting words in my mouth I assume because you have no argument. I can’t even parse this.

You started an argument with a stance I never took by railing against a bogeyman I never advanced. And now you’re doing it again.

If communism was anything more than an impractical ideal then you should have been able to point out where it actually exists. But of course it doesn’t exist. It’s just a fantasy. Maybe you want it to exist so you can point a finger and say “see what happens when you don’t do what I want?”?


If they insist on using LLMs to generate trash, just use LLMs to do trash reviews on their code.

> how do you represent arbitrary spatial relationships on computers in a general and scalable way?

Isn't this essentially what the convolutional layers do in LeNet?


Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

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

Search: