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

They mention this later in the article. It's still about 6 tonnes for the battery to store as much effective energy as the diesel tank.

It seemed like the author had moved on from EVs so I thought he was done, but okay. Should've finished I guess.

The article still never accounts for the fact that motors+inverters are ~2 tonnes lighter than an engine+transmission.


Or your reading comprehension is not good enough. I didn't have any problem finding the paragraph where he author goes into extra detail. Who can say.

I imagine it would be something like Option<NonZeroF32>, since -2.0 + 2.0 would violate the constraints at runtime. This gets us the Option handling problem back.

I think the article would have been better with NonZeroPositiveF32 as the example type, since then addition would be safe.


> vibe coded

> more performant

I found the problem.


I mean, we both know it couldn't, but the company claims it can be done so why don't they do it?

I suppose because generating tokens is slow. It is a limitation of the technology. And when data is coming in slowly, you don't need a super high performance client.

Do you really need an incredibly slow client though?

...I think a vibe-coded Cocoa app could absolutely be more performant than a run-of-the-mill Electron app. It probably wouldn't beat something heavily optimized like VS Code, but most Electron apps aren't like that.

Anything that can be automated can be automated poorly indeed. But while it has been proven that textile manufacturing can be automated well (or at least better than a hand weaver ever could), the jury is still out if programming can be sufficiently automated at all. Even if programming can be completely automated, it's also unclear if the current LLM strategy will be enough or whether we'll have another 30 year AI winter before something better comes along.

Oh no! Reading!

Sorry for the snark but why is this such a problem?


Because people won't do it.

Sounds like a them problem. If they can't be bothered to learn how to use their tools, it won't be a surprise that they then won't know how to use them. A free advantage to those of us that do dedicate the time to read the docs I guess.

At least in web development it really seems to have become widely accepted, at least at many places, that people aren't expected to be anywhere near experts in the tools they use every day.

It's just a self-built UBI.

Is your claim that music industry lawyers are that much scarier than movie industry lawyers? Because the big labs don't seem to have any problem releasing models that create (possibly infringing) video.

The movie industry is doing well from AI.

Thus far AI has only been used to create fan fiction clips that generate free marketing for legacy IP on TikTok. And the rights holders know that if AI gets good enough to make feature length movies then they'll be able to aggressively use various legal mechanisms to take the videos off major sites and pursue the creators. Long term it could potentially lower internal production costs by getting rid of actors & writers.

Music is very different. The production cost is already zero, and people generating their own Taylor Swift songs is a real competitive threat to Spotify etc.


Just right now: ByteDance to curb AI video app after Disney legal threat

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93wq6xqgy1o


> Is your claim that music industry lawyers are that much scarier than movie industry lawyers?

Not qoez:

You have to balance market opportunities with the risk of reputational damage and litigation risk.

Video will probably make a lot more money than audio, so you are willing to take a bigger risk. Additionally, at least for Google there exists a strong synergy between their video generation models and YouTube, which makes it even more sensible for Google to make video models available to the public despite these risks.


well i guess the music industry is a lot more monopolized than video, plus there is a lot of video out there that isn't "movies," while there's not a lot of music that isn't... "music"

Kinda weird to blame Zig for not being at 1.0 yet while Jai is still in closed beta after 11 years. Meanwhile Zig is being in used in big-ish projects all over while Jai has... a single game engine? Jai looks cool but it's far far FAR behind and losing ground.

The fallacy of that argument would be if its author would seek adoption, however like Naughty Dog with their Lisp based language, John has no plans to have Jai win world adoption beyone his game engine.

That may be, but OP tried to claim that

> once Jai comes out, Zig will become obsolete

If Jai is happy to have limited adoption (which is fine), other languages will by definition not be displaced by Jai. That is even if we accept OPs implied point, that Jai is good enough to displace Zig, without further discussion. But even that seems to be rather doubtful.


Agreed, however I also think Zig will be another Coffee Script, PureScript, Elm,...

I advise to revisit HN posts about them.


Sure, but Zig has way more money and people working on it. And Jai has inspired all of these new languages so all they had to do was to steal John's ideas whereas he had to actually think very hard about them and do countless iterations to come to a solid conclusion. He paid the cost, they reaped the benefits. So Zig being 10 years old and unfinished just shows they have no original thought, or a plan for that matter.

I don't even know how you got to "used twice" tbh. Both your own comment AND the post you quoted from only have a single "must".

The only thing that text demands is understanding and carefully weighing the implications. If, having done that, you conclude that you don't want to then there is absolutely nothing in the spec stopping you. Maybe the spec would have been better off putting more stuff in SHALL and less in SHOULD, but as written that is definitely not the case.



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

Search: