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

I think you meant to write herbicide rather than pesticide.

How do you get snow on your TV these days? The last few televisions I've had show a blue screen when there's no signal.

Your best bet is probably to attach a VCR, if you can find one; they generally have a tuner, and I think most TVs still usually have a component input and/or, in Europe, SCART.

I'd be a little surprised if anyone still makes a TV with an analog tuner.


If any of you manage to get snow and have a smoke, let us all know how you go in the comments :)

> design a universal app engine

You've reminded me of the XKCD comic about standards: https://xkcd.com/927/

Do you really want a universal app engine? If you don't have a good reason for ignoring platform guidelines (as many games do), then don't. The best applications on any platform are the ones that embrace the platform's conventions and quirks.

I get why businesses will settle for mediocre, but for personal projects why would you? Pick the platform you use and make the best application you can. If you must have cross-platform support, then decouple your UI and pick the right language and libraries for each platform (SwiftUI on Mac, GTK for Linux, etc...).


Platforms and app engines are orthogonal concerns. I agree that platform guidelines are worth preserving, and the web as a platform solves it by hijacking the rectangle that the native platform yields to it. Any app engine could do the same thing.

> the web as a platform solves it by hijacking the rectangle that the native platform yields to it

That's a terrible solution that preserves nothing. Try using a screen reader with an app rendered onto a rectangle.


Please, for the love of all that is holy, not GTK.

Is the modern version of that to think of the people around you as NPCs?

It depends on the type of help you seek, but generally you are given tools and techniques to deploy in those situations that can help.

A grande americano at Starbucks is a 16 oz drink with three shots of espresso. Have one in the morning and one in the afternoon and you are at six shots of espresso. That doesn't seem all that enormous to me.

75mg per shot = 450mg caffeine

That's a bit over the recommended limit of 400mg a day the Mayo Clinic, FDA, etc. recommend. Not sure it it qualifies as 'enormous' or not.


The amount of caffeine that humans require to live is 0 mg. So ...

Irrelevant to the question (How much is 'enormous'?).

It was a slight attempt to highlight that the conversation about a purely subjective thing is missing the point entirely. In the context of scientific discovery trying to qualify the outcome based on an individual's personal interpretation of descriptive words is a fool's errand. Attempting to justify one's personal habits or predilections is squarely in the flat earther camp of scientific belief.

How would you define gambling? Would it make trading stocks illegal?

Lots of countries have managed to legally define gambling and ban it without making stock trading illegal. Even the US. This isn't some gotcha.

That would require a functioning legislative branch that could pass laws. However a major political program of the past decades has been to gum up Congress and prevent its functioning. There's very limited bandwidth to accomplish legislation, and there's hundreds of good fixes that can't fit through, so I doubt the US will be able to fix this anytime soon, unless there's bigger scandal.

This would make sense if Congress never passed laws. They can and routinely do. That they don't limit their behavior is unsurprising.

The passage of some laws is completely consistent with my description of a dysfunctional system that can not get many good reforms through.

Getting some bills passed does not equate to adequate legislative capacity.


If it is based on chance, then it is gambling.

Until the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000, Collateral Debt Obligations were regulated differently in different states. Some said it was insurance, and thus regulated it like insurance. Some said it was gambling and banned it outright. Instead, regulation was handed to a toothless new agency who got little funding for enforcement and the rest of the world got the 2008 financial crisis.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernizatio...


> If it is based on chance, then it is gambling.

Is there much difference between picking a horse at the track or a stock on an exchange?


> The board should look for an executive team that knows how to use what it has.

I was thinking the exact same thing. This makes them look pathetic.

Meta is very selective in their hiring process. If they can't figure out how to use these incredibly talented and driven people, then that's a failure of leadership. How do they not have an enormous backlog of promising and interesting ideas to pursue?

They've got the cash, they've got the people, they just don't have any imagination or ambition. Better management would see the current situation is an opportunity, not a problem.


You're thinking way too literally.

I think "garage door up" means "in the open".

Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

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

Search: