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

No one might be Job-level ahole, but I'm certain Cook ain't less ruthless. It's a matter of priorities, not attitude.

Java bytecode is always dynamically linked.

still, if I remember correctly I had to reserve 6gig of memory so that the jvm could actually start

> But what happens if there was a cosmic bit flip in a dynamic library?

You'd need multiple of those, because you have ECC. Not impossible, but getting all those dice rolled the same way requires even bigger scale than Google's.


If he himself believes he can achieve his off-the-cuff deadlines or not doesn't matter for the rest of us: he already proven himself to be a fabulist, and after so many failed predictions, should know better than to air them in public, especially as he must be acutely aware that making such claims inflates his and his companies' net worth, and hence has legal implications. Only he cares not about those, as none of his past misdeeds had any serious consequences to himself.

Somehow his company is worth ~1.6 trillion dollars, with most of that valuation being confidence in his predictions. He is predicting humanoid useful robots soon. Tesla's valuation defies reason

Tesla stock goes up because it frequently goes up. It's a top-tier "buy the dip stock". Analysts know it, traders know it, the stock is a consistent winner. A total house of cards, but it hasn't fallen yet.

Well, feel free to short Tesla.

(And I say that with conviction. https://hindenburgresearch.com/ are my heroes.)


The problem with shorting is always timing. Additionally, with companies like TSLA or other large companies there's always the risk of a government bailout/backstop. The easiest way to predict the future is to look at incentives. Many of the people in power have huge incentives to not let companies like these fail/drop so it ends up taking an enormous event to trigger the unwinding.

The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent

You are right, but still I'd be much more concerned about snake oil from companies that no one can short.

The persistent short interest in Tesla shows at least that the critics are voicing their concerns in the market.

You and I might think that Tesla is overvalued, maybe. But if it's a bubble, at least it's not a fragile one that pops at the slightest pin prick like a few shorts.


Less LOC also doesn't imply simplicity: just look at the demoscene, which often has the former but not the latter.

Demo scene or other competitions that aim at using little space / shortest way to achieve something are not really a good counter example.

Your analogy won’t hold scrutiny with a competitive cyclist: newer bikes are also faster given the same rider, even if not as meaningfully as a new CPU.

And modern bikes do make with the need for cable replacement or breakage (hydro lines and electric shifting, while more expensive to service, also require much less of it).


Life tip: Noone appreciates and there's no utility in nitpicking analogies. They're never the actual point of the message and it's incredibly rude and socially inept to lock onto a side quest like that.


idk, the OP is all about the author misunderstanding what they bought. Hence a comment about bikes not understanding bikes deserves just as much scrutiny.

My own life tip: there are plenty of good analogies, so no need to choose use an example you are not familiar with.


With this comment you completely validate izacus (shaky) judgement call: when you write "a comment about bikes not understanding bikes" you are clearly more interested in being rude than pointing out a flaw in the analogy.

We all see that OP does understand bikes in the general sense, indeed the fact you are nitpicking instead of trying to explain one of the many fundamental difference means you think that as well.


To me, it suggests that analogies aren't as useful as we'd like them to be. Either the analogy is perfect, in which case nothing is any simpler, or it's imperfect, in which case you're now distracted by the differences.

They're not totally without value but I find that it's generally better to avoid a analogies. Look for some other route to make the point.


Analogies are a simplification. The problem is not that they can’t capture the whole thing in detail. But that they just don’t stand up to any adversity (because that isn’t what they are for). They are only good for explaining things, not for arguing.

They rely on the recipient going along with the analogy and trying to make it work, not trying to find problems with it. If someone understands the concept well enough to needle the analogy, they probably have a better understanding than the analogy can provide anyway, so it is fine to give it up.

In this case it is neither used for arguing, nor for explanation really, I think, but as a bit of rhetorical flair. The analogy is to an obviously stupid thing to do, throw away your bike because of some easy to fix cabling issue.


If your threat model is AWS deciding you break their AUP, the issue is with you doing AUP breaking stuff. This ain’t your personal Google Play account.


Even if you do SaaS. Some customers would ask you about known vulnerabilities in your images, and making it easy to show quick remediation schedule can make deals easier to close.


I don't think Forgejo is competitive in the markets GitHub makes most of their money from, nor does it seem Forgejo developers want it to be.


Where does GitHub even make most of their money? Their compliance posture makes them a non-starter for any regulated industries (which is atypical for a Microsoft property, generally MS is the market leader for compliance in all of their products).


Places might be officially regulated, but neither government agencies, healthcare, finance or defense industries are as strict as you think. People have to get stuff done, and most are usually quite incompetent in these protected industries.

Microsoft’s sales reps know this.


Given that a lot of places that deal with money use them, I find your comment quite interesting and would like to learn more :)


The easiest way is to compare GitHub's compliance report list with, say, Atlassian Bitbucket.

https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-cloud@latest/organizat...

https://www.atlassian.com/trust/compliance/resources


Representatives from the Dutch government recently had a chat with representatives from Forgejo because they are quite interested in migrating their SCM infrastructure from Github to Forgejo.

And trust me, they are running a lot of public and private repositories.

And there are many more orgs and govs throughout Europe doing similar things because there's a (growing) zeitgeist here that the Trump administration nor any American SaaS company can be trusted. This started, by the way, after Microsoft suspended the ICJ from using Microsoft 365 on orders from the White House.


Can confirm.

I have seen this sentiment more and more, which is welcome to me as it’s a drum I have been banging for 15 years.

I have never had so many empathetic conversations than I have recently.


Sounds familiar!

Everybody now is like "Hey, we can take something like Kubernetes which is open source and is backed by a worldwide community, and you know like OpenStack which is open source and is backed by a worldwide community and we can build our own computing platform and deploy services and online communities and stuff on top of that"

And I was like "Wait, you guys are realizing that NOW?!? I've been an activist and part of a movement urging you all to try and be less dependent on US Big Tech and focus more on decentralization for YEARS"

Like you I am really happy things seem to get rolling now, though :)


The Dutch government represenrative mentioned contacts with French colleagues about this also.


He plead to a crime, which must’ve cut him off from most government work.

He seems to be on a PR tour now, I guess to try and get other work. Some people blast every connection on LinkedIn, he seems to take a different approach and guest on every testosterone fueled and non-fact checked podcast.


There's only one podcast that could conceivably fact-check him, and that's the official CIA podcast, and somehow I doubt very very much that they'd be interested in having him on.


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

Search: